You can spin it through a washing machine on multiple cycles but the point is that when Trump did it you all went nuts. When Pelosi did it you think it's fine or whatever variation of that the mainstream media is telling you to think.
Yeah, like when the CIA killed Kennedy because he used diplomacy to handle the Bay of Pigs crisis. Now we don't have anyone like Kennedy in power. It's all idiotic neocons so Tracy is right to be alarmed. They want war with Russia and China and they don't care if it risks the whole planet. You don't have a problem because you have become a neocon yourself.
"The CIA killed Kennedy so Michael Tracey is right" is the perfect pro-Tracey argument.
Michael Tracey is an "independent journalist" and one of Tucker Carlson's foremost experts.
Tucker Carlson is one of the few commentators who will have people he disagrees with on air to discuss topics. Michael Tracy has independent views, but seems to be a leftist and also anti-war.
Nohere, of course, smears anyone who goes on Tucker Carlson, but he has a huge audience and it's good they get to hear varied views. You never hear a varied view on CNN.
Michael Tracey doesn't appear on Tucker's show to disagree with him.
You can spin it through a washing machine on multiple cycles but the point is that when Trump did it you all went nuts. When Pelosi did it you think it's fine or whatever variation of that the mainstream media is telling you to think.
Another example of why I'm never all that tempted to take up Nan's invitation to watch any of the videos she posts, and rarely the non-videos she posts. If she has this much trouble accurately understanding and describing what people say and believe on this very site, what are the odds she's a reliable guide elsewhere?
Ok, sorry for assuming you would hate a guy who thought Russiagate was total BS. I apologize. Maybe you would have liked him. Why don't you follow him on twitter and see how it goes.
I perused his twitter account and it reminded my why I never go on to twitter. There's no redeeming quality about the platform. I always feel like I lose a few brain cells on it. It's too manic for me.
I don't even know how to see who I am following - and it's probably fewer than 10 people. Maybe I'll figure it out one of these days. I tend to only go there with nan and paul retweets on here.
I can't believe that anyone would believe that bull caca. What kind of ignorant people does Tracey think comprise his audience?
The Chinese Ambassador makes it clear, despite being interrupted by the rude CNN talking head, that he agrees with Michael Tracy.
Whoa, stop the presses. This is HUGE. The Chinese ambassador who obviously thinks that Pelosi's visit to Taiwan is a bad idea agrees with Michael Tracey who feels the same way.
Mike's too young to remember the Cold War, he's exaggerating this situation compared to back then.
A reminder that Tracey just learned about Guam.
Tracey just made an **** out of himself. There are direct flights to Guam connecting through places like Tokyo or Honolulu. If it didn't take so long to get there, Guam would be a popular tourist destination.
How did he make an **** out of himself by saying he wanted to know more about Guam? Is it no longer OK to show in interest in researching a topic?
There's this thing called Google where you can do some basic fact-checking before opening your mouth. That he didn't do this leads me to conclude that he just throws endless **** at the wall to see what sticks.
There is this thing called curiosity and no one should be afraid to express that online. Give the guy a break.
If he was asking a question where the answer was not easily found, maybe, but acting like Guam is some mysterious unknown island without direct flights that nobody had ever heard of was just ignorant, inflammatory agitprop.
I can't believe that anyone would believe that bull caca. What kind of ignorant people does Tracey think comprise his audience?
The Chinese Ambassador makes it clear, despite being interrupted by the rude CNN talking head, that he agrees with Michael Tracy.
In a devastating rejoinder to me, Ms. Nan points out that the Chinese Ambassador endorses Michael Tracey's parroting of the Chinese government's bull caca.
You can spin it through a washing machine on multiple cycles but the point is that when Trump did it you all went nuts. When Pelosi did it you think it's fine or whatever variation of that the mainstream media is telling you to think.
Another example of why I'm never all that tempted to take up Nan's invitation to watch any of the videos she posts, and rarely the non-videos she posts. If she has this much trouble accurately understanding and describing what people say and believe on this very site, what are the odds she's a reliable guide elsewhere?
Time for the daily personal attack. Nice to know you read/watch none of my evidence but are sure it’s bad.
Time for the daily personal attack. Nice to know you read/watch none of my evidence but are sure it’s bad.
You can take it however you wish. In my experience, people's politics don't tell much about them as a whole, so I'm not making any implications about you as a person here -- for all I know if we knew each other in person and agreed not to talk politics, we'd get along great. We share at least some similar cook books.
But in the area of political discussions, your inattention to detail is a weakness. If you can look at this thread, where people said they thought Pelosi's trip was a bad idea, and then draw the erroneous conclusion that people supported Pelosi's trip, then you're clearly having trouble understanding what people are saying here. And if you can make a claim like that the participants on this thread went crazy when Trump mentioned Taiwan, but can't be bothered to verify that and, when the relevant thread is linked and you saw your claim was unsupported, couldn't be bothered to amend your claim, then you're clearly someone who, in politics, doesn't care a great deal as to the veracity or accuracy of her claims.
So when you make claims on more complex topics, the kind that aren't easily verified or disproven by simple reading posts on a thread you're participating or using the MOL search feature, it's likely the same pattern will be present again.
If you're primarily here just to vent your feelings, none of this is particularly relevant. Does it really matter whether or not there was a genocide in the Donbas, when put against your very strong feeling that American foreign policy is a disaster?
On the other hand, if you're frustrated by the way, for instance, I don't take your claims seriously, now you have a road map to change that.
the reason nan thought that we were supporting Pelosi's trip is that none of us agreed with nan's feeling that Pelosi was risking WW III, or some other huge reaction by China. Our opposition to her trip was more measured and not based on a histrionic view of the ramifications.
so because we didn't agree with her view on the trip, we therefore must be supporting it.
the reason nan thought that we were supporting Pelosi's trip is that none of us agreed with nan's feeling that Pelosi was risking WW III, or some other huge reaction by China. Our opposition to her trip was more measured and not based on a histrionic view of the ramifications.
so because we didn't agree with her view on the trip, we therefore must be supporting it.
I still think Pelosi is risking WWIII. I'm happy nothing violent happened during the visit, but China has made it clear that a red line has been crossed and there will be consequences.
Anyway, I did not think anyone except nohero actively supported the visit, but I do think you all underestimate the severity of the situation. So, I kinda agree with you but you exaggerate.
Time for the daily personal attack. Nice to know you read/watch none of my evidence but are sure it’s bad.
You can take it however you wish. In my experience, people's politics don't tell much about them as a whole, so I'm not making any implications about you as a person here -- for all I know if we knew each other in person and agreed not to talk politics, we'd get along great. We share at least some similar cook books.
But in the area of political discussions, your inattention to detail is a weakness. If you can look at this thread, where people said they thought Pelosi's trip was a bad idea, and then draw the erroneous conclusion that people supported Pelosi's trip, then you're clearly having trouble understanding what people are saying here. And if you can make a claim like that the participants on this thread went crazy when Trump mentioned Taiwan, but can't be bothered to verify that and, when the relevant thread is linked and you saw your claim was unsupported, couldn't be bothered to amend your claim, then you're clearly someone who, in politics, doesn't care a great deal as to the veracity or accuracy of her claims.
So when you make claims on more complex topics, the kind that aren't easily verified or disproven by simple reading posts on a thread you're participating or using the MOL search feature, it's likely the same pattern will be present again.
If you're primarily here just to vent your feelings, none of this is particularly relevant. Does it really matter whether or not there was a genocide in the Donbas, when put against your very strong feeling that American foreign policy is a disaster?
On the other hand, if you're frustrated by the way, for instance, I don't take your claims seriously, now you have a road map to change that.
What cook books do we share?
You annoy me because you continue to judge my posting in negative explanatory terms that you would not use if I agreed with you. It's not true and quite insulting. Kind of influenced by the "Mind of Putin" scholars you admire. The usual co-opting of common sense tone does not help either.
You will not believe anything I say unless I provide an impossible level of detail--while no one else is subjected to this requirement. I spend a lot of time posting and doing research you don't see - reading and watching videos. I will not be spending even more time verifying a stupid post about Trump when I know the big picture is that anything Trump does is bad and anything Biden (Democrats) do is good. I only have so much time and I will spend that on important tasks. I have to let the small potatoes go. You don't watch videos or read outside of mainstream media and you desperately believe the US is a force for good so you have more time.
I rarely spend any time on the MOL search features because I'm more interested in discussing topics than trying to "own" some MOL poster who I never agree with anyway. I don't know if you notice this, but when I am shown to be in the right and others were wrong, I usually don't spend much time rubbing their nose in it--the way they do to me. I'm really here to talk about stuff and I don't expect everyone to be perfect but I wish everyone could be a little less petty.
The Donbas issue is part of the larger understanding that Russia had eight years of provocation before entering this proxy war and that the war was deliberately sought by the US government. They are trying to the same thing in Taiwan. It's right there out in the open but you can't see.
I don't care if you take my claims seriously or not because I don't respect your viewpoint. You seem like an intelligent, thoughtful person, and you enjoy writing online as I do, but you have stubbornly cast your lot with the mainstream view which I know to be false and dishonest. Thus, you probe everything, request absurd levels of detail and try to find some angle from which it can be disputed so you can cling on to this childish fantasy that the US government is an honest actor when it comes to any foreign policy topic. Your road map leads to an acceptance of things I stopped believing in 2016. That ship has sailed.
I don't know if you notice this, but when I am shown to be in the right and others were wrong, I usually don't spend much time rubbing their nose in it--the way they do to me.
For the life of me I can't think of one case since we started the Russia threads where you were shown to be right.
I don't know if you notice this, but when I am shown to be in the right and others were wrong, I usually don't spend much time rubbing their nose in it--the way they do to me.
For the life of me I can't think of one case since we started the Russia threads where you were shown to be right.
I've been right almost all the time, but you don't agree so that leads to lots of arguing. I'm stating the obvious here. Also, that you are often insensitive. There is this thing called kindness. Check it out sometime.
Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan highlights once again concerns about China’s putative designs on its peaceful neighbor Taiwan and reminds me of one of the shrewdest events in 20th-century world politics. On July 31, 1988, King Hussein announced that Jordan would renounce all claims to the West Bank, thereby shedding Jordan of obligations for which the king was happy to be freed.
In that vein, China should renounce all claims to Taiwan. Its claim is mired in the whirlwind of post-World War II geopolitics and has become a lodestone that continues to affect world politics. The political good will, easing of tensions and economic benefits, both to the region and the world, of doing so can hardly be overstated.
The potential mass loss of life, the unimaginable property destruction and the lasting enmity of the Taiwanese that could create an East Asian equivalent of the Israeli-Palestinian situation in the West Bank would be avoided.
The folks in Oslo will notice. And in an instant, China’s influence and standing in the world would be heightened and burnished. A realpolitik win-win.
Without reliable polling on what the people of Taiwan want, the anecdotes are meaningless. If Taiwan doesn't want U.S. support, they can just say no thank you.
Without reliable polling on what the people of Taiwan want, the anecdotes are meaningless. If Taiwan doesn't want U.S. support, they can just say no thank you.
Here's the original tweet, which Ben Norton took his video from, and a pertinent reply to that tweet.
Ouch, seriously? You compare a few weirdos to the official statement?https://t.co/8qwVecv7Iu
Without reliable polling on what the people of Taiwan want, the anecdotes are meaningless. If Taiwan doesn't want U.S. support, they can just say no thank you.
Here's the original tweet, which Ben Norton took his video from, and a pertinent reply to that tweet.
I don't know how many were in that demonstration but just because they are in the minority does not make them wrong. There have been plenty of times in history when only some people saw the folly of the situation, while the rest were brainwashed by the mainstream media to support something against their own interests.
What Pelosi did was provocative and dangerous. The majority of Taiwan may well realize this soon.
Without reliable polling on what the people of Taiwan want, the anecdotes are meaningless. If Taiwan doesn't want U.S. support, they can just say no thank you.
Here's the original tweet, which Ben Norton took his video from, and a pertinent reply to that tweet.
I don't know how many were in that demonstration but just because they are in the minority does not make them wrong. There have been plenty of times in history when only some people saw the folly of the situation, while the rest were brainwashed by the mainstream media to support something against their own interests.
What Pelosi did was provocative and dangerous. The majority of Taiwan may well realize this soon.
If you were a world leader you would fold at every attempt at bullying. Just give them what they want.
We should leave China and Taiwan alone and let them sort this out.
No. Not everybody wants to f*ck over all the people on Taiwan like that.
No, the neocons who control the mainstream media have made intelligent people like yourself think stupid things like going to war with Russia AND China is a good idea.
No. Not everyone wants to F*over all the people in the US like that. But there are too many who think it's a great idea.
Did you notice how many Russian sanctions they are now walking back on the down low?
nan - is this the thread where you said we all went crazy when T**** mentioned Taiwan?
https://maplewood.worldwebs.com/forums/discussion/trump-risks-china-rift-with-taiwan-call