The alt right - Mod Warning in OP

oscarBravo

FA Hayek wrote: »

It is very VERY telling that you take issue with this and not the fact that a poster freely admits to leaving his critical faculties at the door when it comes to a debate on the virtues or otherwise on the president elect.

There's not a lot to debate. He was objectively a pretty terrible person before he became a candidate; he was an utterly appalling candidate before he was elected; he's shaping up to be a truly disastrous President before he's even inaugurated.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that he could surprise us all by being a merely mediocre President, but if his presidency manages to be anything better than a disaster, it will probably be through no fault of his own.

oscarBravo

frostyjacks wrote: »

So in the name of diversity, King's College London have removed an image of the former Archbishop of Canterbury, because he holds traditional Christian views on marriage.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4056430/King-s-College-London-removes-photo-former-Archbishop-Canterbury-wall-fame-amid-student-anger-views-gay-marriage.html

Isn't this the opposite of diversity? They seem to want us all to believe in a single, uniform set of ideas and ostracise anybody that thinks different.

How come you're upset about the removal of Carey's picture, but not Desmond Tutu's?

Professor Moriarty

Widdershins wrote: »

If you say so. As I said-he doesn't have a good reputation. It was hardly improved by 'quietly' leaving the organisation in the wake of multiple accusations against him.

I certainly won't be heeding any moral preaching of his.

That's fair enough and I understand why you might not. However, He didn't leave quietly, he strenuously denied any wrongdoing before agreeing to leave according to the Mail.

frostyjacks

oscarBravo wrote: »

How come you're upset about the removal of Carey's picture, but not Desmond Tutu's?

The campaign was specifically against Carey, and not Tutu.

Thomas_...

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It's a combination of straw man and ad hominum. Chump is a clown. That is an indisputable fact. So if they can't dispute the fact all that is left is deflection and personal attack. When it happens, you know you've won the debate.

Not just that, his arrogance appears to have no bounds as he is about to take on China by appointing China critic Peter Navarro to trade post.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38399712

There already is trouble with this unfortunate example of a misguided election before he even has past the inauguration.

PS: I like the way you name him as "Chump", that is really fitting.

Thomas_...

20Cent wrote: »

Can I ask are Trump supporters disappointed that he is dropping all his policies already or are ye ok with that?

In the end of the day, the benefectors of Trump will be the same as always and those are the rich. So, the "working class" who were stupid enough to fall for that clap-trap Populist will bitterly regret it soon enough to have voted for him. Well, they brought it onto themselves and can only blame themselves for that, pity that the others who didn't vote for him will have to suffer the same fate.

Professor Moriarty

Thomas_... wrote: »

Not just that, his arrogance appears to have no bounds as he is about to take on China by appointing China critic Peter Navarro to trade post.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38399712

There already is trouble with this unfortunate example of a misguided election before he even has past the inauguration.

PS: I like the way you name him as "Chump", that is really fitting.

His appointment of Friedman as ambassador to Israel was equally jaw-dropping. Chump seems to be approaching international diplomacy as if it were an episode of The Apprentice.

Billy86

Thomas_... wrote: »

Not just that, his arrogance appears to have no bounds as he is about to take on China by appointing China critic Peter Navarro to trade post.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38399712

There already is trouble with this unfortunate example of a misguided election before he even has past the inauguration.

PS: I like the way you name him as "Chump", that is really fitting.

Don't worry, the Trumeteers will just pretend that Navarro & Trump haven't been speaking out against China, including their military actions, and taking action against them. Kind of messes with their whole "Clinton warmonger, Russia, #Trumpforworldpeace!" narrative a bit too much and they haven't been told what to say about it yet. So we'll continue to just get silence and denial until the memo is sent out to them.

Thomas_...

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Thomas_... wrote: »

Not just that, his arrogance appears to have no bounds as he is about to take on China by appointing China critic Peter Navarro to trade post.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38399712

There already is trouble with this unfortunate example of a misguided election before he even has past the inauguration.

PS: I like the way you name him as "Chump", that is really fitting.

His appointment of Friedman as ambassador to Israel was equally jaw-dropping. Chump seems to be approaching international diplomacy as if it were an episode of The Apprentice.

This all comes from when a Nation votes in a billionare who thinks he can run a state like his own companies and such things don't go well, not even in the mid run. Chump is very likely to cause more damage to USA's reputation than even G. W. Bush jr. had and the latter chap did much of it, so much that even Obaman in his 8 years couldn't redeem all of it.

For me, the Chump cabinet so far is like a mirror image of the Muppet Show, just Miss Piggy is yet still missing.

Thomas_...

Billy86 wrote: »

Thomas_... wrote: »

Not just that, his arrogance appears to have no bounds as he is about to take on China by appointing China critic Peter Navarro to trade post.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38399712

There already is trouble with this unfortunate example of a misguided election before he even has past the inauguration.

PS: I like the way you name him as "Chump", that is really fitting.

Don't worry, the Trumeteers will just pretend that Navarro & Trump haven't been speaking out against China, including their military actions, and taking action against them. Kind of messes with their whole "Clinton warmonger, Russia, #Trumpforworldpeace!" narrative a bit too much and they haven't been told what to say about it yet. So we'll continue to just get silence and denial until the memo is sent out to them.

Jesus wept! This Chump bully is the biggest threat to world peace himself.

Professor Moriarty

Thomas_... wrote: »

This all comes from when a Nation votes in a billionare who thinks he can run a state like his own companies and such things don't go well, not even in the mid run. Chump is very likely to cause more damage to USA's reputation than even G. W. Bush jr. had and the latter chap did much of it, so much that even Obaman in his 8 years couldn't redeem all of it.

For me, the Chump cabinet so far is like a mirror image of the Muppet Show, just Miss Piggy is yet still missing.

Quite simply, this won't end well. I had hoped that he would surround himself with relatively sane people or that the GOP would prevail upon him, but his cabinet and advisors are carved from the same dumb rock. The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

oscarBravo

frostyjacks wrote: »

The campaign was specifically against Carey, and not Tutu.

But your complaint was about the removal of Carey's picture, not about the fact that people expressed displeasure with his bigotry.

So why are you bothered by the removal of Carey's picture and not Tutu's?

demfad

Thomas_... wrote: »

This all comes from when a Nation votes in a billionare who thinks he can run a state like his own companies and such things don't go well, not even in the mid run. Chump is very likely to cause more damage to USA's reputation than even G. W. Bush jr. had and the latter chap did much of it, so much that even Obaman in his 8 years couldn't redeem all of it.

For me, the Chump cabinet so far is like a mirror image of the Muppet Show, just Miss Piggy is yet still missing.

He has 6 donors to his campaign in cabinet. Big worry is how socially conservative it is. A lot of right wing religious conservatives there.
Looks like Bannon/Mercer are calling the shots. Bannon wishes for the destruction of the EU and the break up of the world into 'traditionalist' nations with an end to liberal values and secularity.

FreudianSlippers

Thomas_... wrote: »

In the end of the day, the benefectors of Trump will be the same as always and those are the rich. So, the "working class" who were stupid enough to fall for that clap-trap Populist will bitterly regret it soon enough to have voted for him. Well, they brought it onto themselves and can only blame themselves for that, pity that the others who didn't vote for him will have to suffer the same fate.

I don't anticipate seeing a significant impact on my Federal taxes.

I would also argue the definition of "rich" in the US versus Ireland is vastly different.

Billy86

Thomas_... wrote: »

Jesus wept! This Chump bully is the biggest threat to world peace himself.

There's a reason about 95% of alt-right Trumpeteers don't want to talk about him, his appointments, or what they expect from him - two actually. One, many of them are more or less actually for nothing, just against whatever they can think of (it's always easier to criticise than offer an alternative) and because of this, they're worried that if they put an expectation on him and he doesn't live up to it, it will hurt their essentially "anti everything" stance. And two, a lot of them simply parrot the latest headline they've read from the same, predictable sources.

Those outlets are playing the cards close to their chest about what their expectations are - most likely so they can call it a 'great success' if he builds a full scale wall as promised, or a 'great success' if he makes no headway at all into building any form of structure (and the same for all Trump's policies etc) - and so their parroting Trumpeteers are decidedly quiet on nearly all of it and instead still in full on 'BUT BUT BUT... BUT HILLARY!' mode until further update.

It's all rather cowardly, really. But expected.

Thomas_...

demfad wrote: »

Thomas_... wrote: »

This all comes from when a Nation votes in a billionare who thinks he can run a state like his own companies and such things don't go well, not even in the mid run. Chump is very likely to cause more damage to USA's reputation than even G. W. Bush jr. had and the latter chap did much of it, so much that even Obaman in his 8 years couldn't redeem all of it.

For me, the Chump cabinet so far is like a mirror image of the Muppet Show, just Miss Piggy is yet still missing.

He has 6 donors to his campaign in cabinet. Big worry is who socially conservative it is. A lot of right wing religious conservatives there.
Looks like Bannon/Mercer are calling the shots. Bannon wishes for the destruction of the EU and the break up of the world into 'traditionalist' nations with an end to liberal values and secularity.

That is all right up Chumps street for otherwise, he hadn't chosen them. To impose ones own world view on others is part of the fascist system. Fascists and Money-men were always "good chums" with each other. Plenty of examples there from history, not only in regards of Germany.

Thomas_...

Billy86 wrote: »

Thomas_... wrote: »

Jesus wept! This Chump bully is the biggest threat to world peace himself.

There's a reason about 95% of alt-right Trumpeteers don't want to talk about him, his appointments, or what they expect from him - two actually. One, many of them are more or less actually for nothing, just against whatever they can think of (it's always easier to criticise than offer an alternative) and because of this, they're worried that if they put an expectation on him and he doesn't live up to it, it will hurt their essentially "anti everything" stance. And two, a lot of them simply parrot the latest headline they've read from the same, predictable sources.

Those outlets are playing the cards close to their chest about what their expectations are - most likely so they can call it a 'great success' if he builds a full scale wall as promised, or a 'great success' if he makes no headway at all into building any form of structure (and the same for all Trump's policies etc) - and so their parroting Trumpeteers are decidedly quiet on nearly all of it and instead still in full on 'BUT BUT BUT... BUT HILLARY!' mode until further update.

It's all rather cowardly, really. But expected.

Matches the Brexiteers for 100% in many ways. Now, that they see that the UK isn't to leave the EU as quickly as they expected, with a government that is still labouring on the "blue print" for the Exit negotiations and still appear to have no clue at all and so on. Just as a side remark, but Chump is just the same awaiting Farage to begging on him to get some Job in which Farage can act as [sic] "a bridge" to him. There are other ways on who to express this attitude of Farage but for the house rules of this site, I am holding them back, but you might easily guess what I mean.

frostyjacks

oscarBravo wrote: »

But your complaint was about the removal of Carey's picture, not about the fact that people expressed displeasure with his bigotry.

So why are you bothered by the removal of Carey's picture and not Tutu's?

You'd have to ask the people who were bothered by his image being up in the first instance. Did you read the article? Nobody was petitioning to remove Tutu's image; only Carey's.

Do they think that if they don't see differing opinions that means they don't exist? What a sheltered life they lead.

K-9

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I don't hate him. But you're logic is sound. I dislike Chump because he is Chump.

Mod:
Use politicians proper surnames please.

Thomas_...

K-9 wrote: »

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I don't hate him. But you're logic is sound. I dislike Chump because he is Chump.

Mod:
Use politicians proper surnames please.

That means to show some person respect despite the fact that the very person concerned has no respect whatsoever of any other people but his own (race)? Sorry, but everybody knows who is addressed by that other name and frankly, the poster who chose it made the perfect choice. I would even deny him to be called a politician because he isn't a real one, he is nothing but an imposter with the big money behind him and not yet inaugurated as President of the USA.

K-9

Mod:
All I'm asking is everybody abide by the same expectations, standards and rules. If you can't do that, well this forum isn't for you and I'd suggest posting on reddit or somewhere that allows that sort of thing.

If you want to reply to this post you can pm me or one of the mods.

oscarBravo

frostyjacks wrote: »

You'd have to ask the people who were bothered by his image being up in the first instance.

Ask them what, exactly?

Did you read the article? Nobody was petitioning to remove Tutu's image; only Carey's.

I read a number of articles on the subject. I also read King's College's statement explaining that the picture wasn't removed as a result of the campaign.

So, the question is: if you're bothered by the picture being removed, why aren't you bothered by the removal of Tutu's? Or that of Sir Michael Howard?

Do they think that if they don't see differing opinions that means they don't exist?

No, they don't think that. They wanted the picture removed because they consider his views on marriage equality - that its proponents' tactics are similar to those of the Nazis, and that it could lead to incest and polygamy - unrepresentative of the diversity of the College.

But that's not why his picture was taken down - if it was, why would Tutu and Howard have been removed also?

frostyjacks

oscarBravo wrote: »

Ask them what, exactly? I read a number of articles on the subject. I also read King's College's statement explaining that the picture wasn't removed as a result of the campaign.

So, the question is: if you're bothered by the picture being removed, why aren't you bothered by the removal of Tutu's? Or that of Sir Michael Howard? No, they don't think that. They wanted the picture removed because they consider his views on marriage equality - that its proponents' tactics are similar to those of the Nazis, and that it could lead to incest and polygamy - unrepresentative of the diversity of the College.

But that's not why his picture was taken down - if it was, why would Tutu and Howard have been removed also?

I assume it's a wall display, so not really feasible to remove an individual section without it looking silly.

They've been campaigning for years to remove it, that's the only reason the college made the decision. Spineless really, when you consider it's Christian heritage.

Whether they like it or not, most people on this planet view marriage as the union of man and woman. That is reality; these students are living in a fantasy world where Hilary won the election and transgender bathrooms are the norm. Delusional.

ancapailldorcha

frostyjacks wrote: »

I assume it's a wall display, so not really feasible to remove an individual section without it looking silly.

They've been campaigning for years to remove it, that's the only reason the college made the decision. Spineless really, when you consider it's Christian heritage.

So, anyone who denounces bigotry and prejudice is "spineless". Odd reasoning. Seems to me that getting off your backside and trying to improve the world would constitute the exact opposite.

frostyjacks wrote: »

Whether they like it or not, most people on this planet view marriage as the union of man and woman. That is reality; these students are living in a fantasy world where Hilary won the election and transgender bathrooms are the norm. Delusional.

But not in the west. A good example is Ireland's recent referendum where the traditional view is quite rightly being questioned and renounced. That is reality.

Billy86

frostyjacks wrote: »

I assume it's a wall display, so not really feasible to remove an individual section without it looking silly.

They've been campaigning for years to remove it, that's the only reason the college made the decision. Spineless really, when you consider it's Christian heritage.

Whether they like it or not, most people on this planet view marriage as the union of man and woman. That is reality; these students are living in a fantasy world where Hilary won the election and transgender bathrooms are the norm. Delusional.

You really don't want to answer why you're so offended about Carey's picture being taken down but not Tutu's, do you? I get it, we all do - deflect, deflect, deflect, etc - but the question has been asked so often that your point blank refusal to answer it is just going to lead people to assume the worst.

Widdershins

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's fair enough and I understand why you might not. However, He didn't leave quietly, he strenuously denied any wrongdoing before agreeing to leave according to the Mail.

People generally do deny their own wrongdoing!
If he was innocent and after an adamant denial why would he then agree to leave. I think an innocent man would fight it all the way. There is likely a very strong reason.
Between that and the support for the white helmets I am not personally full of respect for the man.

oscarBravo

frostyjacks wrote: »

I assume it's a wall display, so not really feasible to remove an individual section without it looking silly.

It's a window display, actually, and the three men depicted were contacted and expressed themselves happy with the proposed changes.

But those are facts, so they're unlikely to dent your sense of outrage.

They've been campaigning for years to remove it, that's the only reason the college made the decision.

So now you're accusing the college of lying as well as spinelessness.

Whether they like it or not, most people on this planet view marriage as the union of man and woman. That is reality; these students are living in a fantasy world where Hilary won the election and transgender bathrooms are the norm. Delusional.

It's a little bit sad, really, how threatened some people feel by the idea of others having equal rights.

frostyjacks

Billy86 wrote: »

You really don't want to answer why you're so offended about Carey's picture being taken down but not Tutu's, do you? I get it, we all do - deflect, deflect, deflect, etc - but the question has been asked so often that your point blank refusal to answer it is just going to lead people to assume the worst.

King's College London removes a photo of the former Archbishop of Canterbury from its 'wall of fame' amid student anger about his views on gay marriage - Daily Mail

King's College removes photo of ex-archbishop opposed to gay marriage - The Guardian

Former Archbishop of Canterbury's picture removed from King's College London amid concerns about his views on gay marriage - Telegraph

'Gay-stapo' campaigners force removal of Archbishop picture from King's College London campus - Evening Standard

Nobody covered this story with reference to Tutu, or Howard, or any of the other people on the wall. It was purely a hate campaign from the LGBT lobby against someone with traditional Christian views on marriage, under the guise of 'diversity'. They've turned that into a toxic word now.

ancapailldorcha

frostyjacks wrote: »

Nobody covered this story with reference to Tutu, or Howard, or any of the other people on the wall. It was purely a hate campaign from the LGBT lobby against someone with traditional Christian views on marriage, under the guise of 'diversity'. They've turned that into a toxic word now.

Amazing how you unflinchingly see bigots as the victims.

PopePalpatine

frostyjacks wrote: »

They've turned [diversity] into a toxic word now.

It's only toxic thanks to the sort of people who tweet "#repealthe19th" after an unsuccessful night on the prowl.