The All Things Political Topic - All people love themselves too much to be changed by something as simple as love.

[Gromnir]

am gonna ignore the questionable legal analysis by @majestic. happy?

however, and perhaps you and others may think o' as a quibble, but pardons is not part o' the legal system in any meaningful sense. justice is blind. in the US it were recognized just how potential exploitive were the pardon power in the hands o' a monarch. however, seeing as how the US President were not a popular elected office or a hereditary title, the founders believed the capacity for exploitation were minimal. suckers. individual state governors with pardon power were a more tricky conundrum, and as such pardon power were hardly universal in the original states. 

is an unfortunate reality that the fair application o' man-made laws will, from time-to-time, result in unconscionable wrongs. the pardon power exists 'cause o' the recognition o' the imperfection o' the legal system, or at least such is the reasoning in the US. 

pardon is not law, is not part o' the legal system. is political, extra-legal and supersedes application o' law even where the law were applied fair and appropriate.  is opposite o' what we think o' as law 'cause one person is given the power to override the application o' democratic created laws and the entire system o' justice which makes those laws meaningful. 

the fact pardon is so potential exploitive and extra-legal in nature is precise why the south african constitution placed considerable limits on their national pardon power. 

point to pardon use as a flaw in the legal system is a mistake, 'cause is one person, a governor or President, acting unilateral to overturn law... ideally to correct a miscarriage o' justice, but as often as not for personal political gain. 

HA! Good Fun!

ps  the fact that a person could languish in prison in spite o' clear evidence they is innocent is indeed a flaw in the legal system and such a result is worthy o' ridicule. however, misuse o' pardon itself is not a valid criticism o' the legal system seeing as the power by decree invalidates the application o' law.

 

Edited December 21, 2021 by Gromnir

[Gfted1]

37 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

I thought they already taught that in the US, in between the allegiance to the flag lessons.

Im not sure, youll have to check with @Hurlsnot. I think someone got butthurt and I dont think children are allowed perform the Pledge of Allegiance anymore and there arent even flags in the classrooms? Back in my day, we did both up through middle school iirc. Hbu?

[BruceVC]

19 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

Dog Idioms and Sayings.

Great link, very interesting 

[BruceVC]

14 hours ago, majestic said:

I originally just wanted to ignore this, but I can't sleep, so why not. See, at the core of fascism, and that is pretty much the only thing academia can agree on when it comes to defining the word in this day and age (and not even that, in some cases, I guess), you'll find what Adolf Hitler later called the Führerprinzip. The glorious leader and the leader's cult of personality. For you though, that doesn't mean following an actual person, just your glorified image of the United States government, of all things, as this glorious, infallible defender of freedom, virtue and justice in the world. The avatar and your own projections, essentially, that can do no wrong and very much rests above the law and justice it deigns to mete out in the world.

The glorious leader that should never be criticised, because everywhere else is worse. That train of thought follows through many of your postings and points of view. Snowden is a traitor, Assange is a terrorist. If someone from Russia and China would leak documents detailing their global espionage programs or human rights violations, or actual war crimes, you'd be at the forefront, leading the vanguard in arguing against them and calling these people heroes. Rightly so, actually. In turn though, when your glorious leader commits war crimes, the one leaking the information is not a hero, but a criminal. So you argue against China violently stopping protests in Hong Kong because China is the enemy, not because you're convinced or believe that protests should not be stopped violently. As long as those protests are at the home front, and heaven forbid, threaten business interests, it suddenly becomes an acceptable train of thought to carpet bomb them with pepper spray, or to send in the police to violently beat miners back to work, because they're hurting the bottom line of stakeholders - and because they shouldn't complain about their lot, miners in China have it worse still.

Russia isn't supposed to support Assad in Syria because Assad is a terrible person. True. But so is Mohammed bin Salman, but he's buying sweet, sweet hardware from your glorious leader, so therefore that cooperation can't be bad. Never mind that having enemies chopped up and dissolved in acid, or locking them up without trial, or beheading them is... well, is that actually any better at all than using chemical weaponry on your own population?

Saudia Arabia is one of the biggest destablizing factors in the Middle East, a topic you love to comment on, except in your glorious leader given worldview, it's actually Iran who is the biggest threat to stability in the Middle East, not the nation that's bankrolling terrorist groups left and right. The Iranians are simply the enemy from a while back because eh, nobody liked Khomeini (and nobody should), especially not when he leads revolutions agains the puppets of the glorious leader.

You look at proof of systemic racism in the United States, and defend it by saying that it's not that bad, after all, it was - maybe still is - way worse in South Africa. As if two wrongs make a right. You look at companies and other nations buying Huawei hardware and argue against it, and when presented with proof - undeniable, hard proof at that, which, remember, does not exist for the opposite claim (although it would be naive to think that there are no backdoors in Huawei hardware, mind) - you default back to "but they wouldn't do the bad things China is going to do with that data", more or less ignoring that Snowden detailed how intelligence agents kept emailing each other with intercepted nude pictures of college students to either make fun of them or whack off to, and tell me, in what way should people of such moral turpitude be trusted to take more care with intelligence they gather than anyone else on the planet? Hint: They shouldn't.

Finally, let's go back to how Assange should trust the United States legal system. I do not know how bad the legal system in South Africa is, to be honest, but it must be pretty terrible if you look at the US and see a model legal system for everyone to emulate. I mean, you actually do believe that Assange is going to get a fair trial in the US. Something which not even a UK court was convinced of, and the UK is, these days, in a hilarious inversion of history, nothing but a colony of the United States. Hell, even their current prime minister is a ludicrous little copy of the former Tangerine in Chief of the United States.

So, no, you're incredibly biased towards your glorious leader, incapable of seeing the flaws where they are, unable to entertain the idea that there are any. You criticise one course of action only to turn around and cheer exactly the same, just because the glorious leader does it. You try to feign neutrality, but in reality love any and all draconian and autocratic measures you can think of, just as long as they're democratically legitimized, because it would look bad if they weren't. Caesar can do no wrong, after all. When Big Brother decides that Eurasia is now an ally, and Eastasia the enemy, then it was always thus, never any different, because who are we to argue, right? There are five fingers, and we all love Big Brother.

We could argue a technicality here and say that actual fascism requires an actual glorious leader as a person, not an idealized symbol of something that either never existed in the first place or is long gone. Perhaps that is the case. If so, then you're not a facist, just a cult member drinking the kool aid. I don't know if that is any better. Probably not. At any rate, that's just semantics.

At the end of the day, you're exactly the sort of person who would read Brave New World and wonder why it's a dystopian vision of the future. *sigh*

I already regret posting this before the fact. Alas, now that I've spent time on this, what am I to do but press Submit Reply. Perhaps the forum will eat the post. Oh, should I only be so lucky...

Well thanks for responding with details, I always appreciate people responding to debates we have. But you have completely misunderstood my ideological views in several ways. I will reply tomorrow as I have just arrived in Durban and Im busy with personal things

I hope we continue to debate this mischaracterization and misperception you have of me where reasonable because its important in life that people understand what motivates us and what our views are on geopolitical events and global events that matter. And I noticed how you had the incorrect views of me when I raised the looting and violence in SA a couple of months ago so hopefully I can change your mind ?

Also always remember " a debate is an exchange of intelligence, an argument is an exchange of ignorance". So lets debate, I really enjoy it 

[BruceVC]

12 hours ago, KP on top of ZA WARUDO said:

**** you, there's too many opportunities for quotes here.

And really too much effort. Wall of texts are for magical girls and Star Trek (including the hoax show that isn't real), not telling what is at best a bad faith troll why their uncritical support for authoritarianism and police states to defend the corporateland is fascist. He is just going to respond with a boiler plate "you funny " and a statement with a question mark at the end, showing that all your words banged into an impenetrable wall of bad faith or true believer ideology. Just call him a name or post a smug anime face lmao.

You funny 

 

[BruceVC]

3 hours ago, Pidesco said:

 

I thought they already taught that in the US, in between the allegiance to the flag lessons.

I dont know but this post seems very socialist, unpatriotic and far left to me ....dont you respect or believe in the significance of your country's flag ?

[Azdeus]

2 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

Im not sure, youll have to check with @Hurlsnot. I think someone got butthurt and I dont think children are allowed perform the Pledge of Allegiance anymore and there arent even flags in the classrooms? Back in my day, we did both up through middle school iirc. Hbu?

Fwiw, never did that as a Swede

[Gromnir]

14 minutes ago, Azdeus said:

Fwiw, never did that as a Swede

the pledge is not prohibited in public schools. gotta keep reminding folks how the US is a republic and is typical left up to states and school districts to decide such issues. the federal courts has determined, and ruled consistent since mid 40s, that persons cannot be compelled to do the pledge, but such a ruling ignores the peer pressure and stigmatizing aspect o' being the one jehovah's witness kid sitting quiet while everybody else were standing and reciting the pledge. so it goes. call it butthurt? regardless, can't be compelled, but is not inherent prohibited by FED law.  again, is a republic, so just 'cause in san jose, ca is perhaps verboten (am not knowing if it is or is not btw,) does not mean in rand, wv school children is likewise freed from a request to join in a daily recitation o' nationalism. 

our legal tender has in god we trust emblazoned on every coin, Congress is opened with a prayer and religious figures, carved in marble or cast in bronze adorn many state and federal buildings, so while the "one nation under god," bit is frequent the avenue by which plaintiffs attempt to exorcise the pledge from schools, is kinda tough to pinpoint exact when the law were transformed to exclude such observations and as such most such cases die swift and forgettable deaths. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gfted1]

35 minutes ago, Azdeus said:

Fwiw, never did that as a Swede

Do you know if any European nation does it?

[Azdeus]

42 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

the pledge is not prohibited in public schools. gotta keep reminding folks how the US is a republic and is typical left up to states and school districts to decide such issues. the federal courts has determined, and ruled consistent since mid 40s, that persons cannot be compelled to do the pledge, but such a ruling ignores the peer pressure and stigmatizing aspect o' being the one jehovah's witness kid sitting quiet while everybody else were standing and reciting the pledge. so it goes. call it butthurt? regardless, can't be compelled, but is not inherent prohibited by FED law.  again, is a republic, so just 'cause in san jose, ca is perhaps verboten (am not knowing if it is or is not btw,) does not mean in rand, wv school children is likewise freed from a request to join in a daily recitation o' nationalism. 

our legal tender has in god we trust emblazoned on every coin, Congress is opened with a prayer and religious figures, carved in marble or cast in bronze adorn many state and federal buildings, so while the "one nation under god," bit is frequent the avenue by which plaintiffs attempt to exorcise the pledge from schools, is kinda tough to pinpoint exact when the law were transformed to exclude such observations and as such most such cases die swift and forgettable deaths. 

HA! Good Fun!

I think the last time Sweden put any trust in "God" was when Carolus Rex proclaimed his crown didn't come from the Church but from god.

Not really serious

39 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Do you know if any European nation does it?

I'll be honest, the thought of anyone but soldiers and doctors giving any kind of oath outside possibly a courtroom is completely foreign to me. I never even came across it until I was in my upper 20's I think so I've never really asked anyone about it. I hadn't even thought about it again until I read it here.

[majestic]

49 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Do you know if any European nation does it?

Not since 1945...

[Azdeus]

After quickly browsing a book on oaths in Sweden, people that wanted to become Swedish citizens no longer had to make an oath of allegiance in 1924, and politicians that took office didn't have to do it anymore on Jan 1, 1975.

If I read it correctly, I'll admit that it was a woefully boring read.

Edited December 21, 2021 by Azdeus

[Gromnir]

am knowing the history o' the bellamy salute has been referenced on these boards in the past, but would appear to be relevant once more, so am offering a link for those who may have forgotten or who never saw.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Pidesco]

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

I dont know but this post seems very socialist, unpatriotic and far left to me ....dont you respect or believe in the significance of your country's flag ?

No

[BruceVC]

6 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

No

I appreciate the response but next time please dont go into so much details with your post, remember Pidesco people have to read your comments to understand your views and time is limited  ...so maybe next time  maybe not so much explanation 

[Pidesco]

4 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I appreciate the response but next time please dont go into so much details with your post, remember Pidesco people have to read your comments to understand your views and time is limited  ...so maybe next time  maybe not so much explanation 

No

[Gfted1]

Oooooooh, the European posters are still harking back to the original hand signal. I should have figured that out (a fascist behind every bush?)   We used to just place our right hand over our heart.

[Pidesco]

It's not the hand sign that makes a flag pledge by school children a bit on the fascist side. 

[rjshae]

10 hours ago, Pidesco said:

No

No means no, no?

[BruceVC]

On 12/21/2021 at 2:41 AM, majestic said:

I originally just wanted to ignore this, but I can't sleep, so why not. See, at the core of fascism, and that is pretty much the only thing academia can agree on when it comes to defining the word in this day and age (and not even that, in some cases, I guess), you'll find what Adolf Hitler later called the Führerprinzip. The glorious leader and the leader's cult of personality. For you though, that doesn't mean following an actual person, just your glorified image of the United States government, of all things, as this glorious, infallible defender of freedom, virtue and justice in the world. The avatar and your own projections, essentially, that can do no wrong and very much rests above the law and justice it deigns to mete out in the world.

The glorious leader that should never be criticised, because everywhere else is worse. That train of thought follows through many of your postings and points of view. Snowden is a traitor, Assange is a terrorist. If someone from Russia and China would leak documents detailing their global espionage programs or human rights violations, or actual war crimes, you'd be at the forefront, leading the vanguard in arguing against them and calling these people heroes. Rightly so, actually. In turn though, when your glorious leader commits war crimes, the one leaking the information is not a hero, but a criminal. So you argue against China violently stopping protests in Hong Kong because China is the enemy, not because you're convinced or believe that protests should not be stopped violently. As long as those protests are at the home front, and heaven forbid, threaten business interests, it suddenly becomes an acceptable train of thought to carpet bomb them with pepper spray, or to send in the police to violently beat miners back to work, because they're hurting the bottom line of stakeholders - and because they shouldn't complain about their lot, miners in China have it worse still.

Russia isn't supposed to support Assad in Syria because Assad is a terrible person. True. But so is Mohammed bin Salman, but he's buying sweet, sweet hardware from your glorious leader, so therefore that cooperation can't be bad. Never mind that having enemies chopped up and dissolved in acid, or locking them up without trial, or beheading them is... well, is that actually any better at all than using chemical weaponry on your own population?

Saudia Arabia is one of the biggest destablizing factors in the Middle East, a topic you love to comment on, except in your glorious leader given worldview, it's actually Iran who is the biggest threat to stability in the Middle East, not the nation that's bankrolling terrorist groups left and right. The Iranians are simply the enemy from a while back because eh, nobody liked Khomeini (and nobody should), especially not when he leads revolutions agains the puppets of the glorious leader.

You look at proof of systemic racism in the United States, and defend it by saying that it's not that bad, after all, it was - maybe still is - way worse in South Africa. As if two wrongs make a right. You look at companies and other nations buying Huawei hardware and argue against it, and when presented with proof - undeniable, hard proof at that, which, remember, does not exist for the opposite claim (although it would be naive to think that there are no backdoors in Huawei hardware, mind) - you default back to "but they wouldn't do the bad things China is going to do with that data", more or less ignoring that Snowden detailed how intelligence agents kept emailing each other with intercepted nude pictures of college students to either make fun of them or whack off to, and tell me, in what way should people of such moral turpitude be trusted to take more care with intelligence they gather than anyone else on the planet? Hint: They shouldn't.

Finally, let's go back to how Assange should trust the United States legal system. I do not know how bad the legal system in South Africa is, to be honest, but it must be pretty terrible if you look at the US and see a model legal system for everyone to emulate. I mean, you actually do believe that Assange is going to get a fair trial in the US. Something which not even a UK court was convinced of, and the UK is, these days, in a hilarious inversion of history, nothing but a colony of the United States. Hell, even their current prime minister is a ludicrous little copy of the former Tangerine in Chief of the United States.

So, no, you're incredibly biased towards your glorious leader, incapable of seeing the flaws where they are, unable to entertain the idea that there are any. You criticise one course of action only to turn around and cheer exactly the same, just because the glorious leader does it. You try to feign neutrality, but in reality love any and all draconian and autocratic measures you can think of, just as long as they're democratically legitimized, because it would look bad if they weren't. Caesar can do no wrong, after all. When Big Brother decides that Eurasia is now an ally, and Eastasia the enemy, then it was always thus, never any different, because who are we to argue, right? There are five fingers, and we all love Big Brother.

We could argue a technicality here and say that actual fascism requires an actual glorious leader as a person, not an idealized symbol of something that either never existed in the first place or is long gone. Perhaps that is the case. If so, then you're not a facist, just a cult member drinking the kool aid. I don't know if that is any better. Probably not. At any rate, that's just semantics.

At the end of the day, you're exactly the sort of person who would read Brave New World and wonder why it's a dystopian vision of the future. *sigh*

I already regret posting this before the fact. Alas, now that I've spent time on this, what am I to do but press Submit Reply. Perhaps the forum will eat the post. Oh, should I only be so lucky...

I was going to respond in detail but I realize your view of me is wrong on so many levels it would take time to refute everything you have mentioned. I will just summarize my points because I dont consider this a debate I want to commit time to because if you were serious about it you would know my real motives....this doesn't mean I dont appreciate your input because you have put your time into this post and that is the foundation of all debates

In summary, I have never considered the US to be perfect and faultless in geopolitical decisions, they make mistakes the same as every country. But the US represents the balance, foundation and agency of all Constitutional Democracies when it comes to military and economic influence and especially Western countries

Without the US  contributing military resources to most UN missions these missions either fail or other countries, like the EU, simply dont do anything and we are beholden to the political machinations of Russia and China. Imagine a world where Russia and China were the most influential?

The EU is a trade union and not a military union and lacks the political will and commitment to address the hegemony of Russia and China. So you being an EU citizen should be supporting the US as your future living in  a Constitutional Democracy has nothing in common with Russia or China unless you dont care about freedom of speech, free media, transparent courts and your government being accountable 

Snowden is a traitor as he broke his NSA contract, publicly revealed highly confidential information  and fled to China and then Russia...I am not sure how in any legal definition you can call him anything else? Maybe in Austria you guys dont believe in people signing binding government contracts about state security but that would make you unique compared to the rest of the world as every country has laws pertaining to confidentiality and what people can and cannot say in public  

Assange is not a traitor but a criminal and alleged racist, I always find it ironic when  people like you defend him around his attacks on the US but you conveniently ignore his sexual  assault charges, I guess rape doesn't fit your narrative so its not a big deal? And I do believe he will get a fair trial in the US but since he is guilty IMO of espionage  in the US he will be found guilty and imprisoned ..we should be happy when the rule of law and order is practised ?He faces "  17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse linked to WikiLeaks’ publication of thousands of leaked military and diplomatic documents " . Here is good link so you can familiarize yourself with this case

https://www.heraldbulletin.com/news/nation_world/uk-court-permits-assange-extradition-to-us-on-spying-charges/article_d32dca96-e27c-5fa0-8621-02d0d2412111.html

And finally the ME is a complicated place with historical ideological conflicts. I am aligned with the group that offers the current best way forward to ensure stability for the region and will ensure the oil supply that the whole world needs is not disrupted . I dont understand how you can suggest Saudi Arabia is the greatest destabilizing factor when its been an ally of the US and other countries since 9/11 and has played a key role in fighting Islamic Extremism. Saudi Arabia has been targeted on numerous occasions by AQ and ISIS and they are are reason for the violence we see linked to extremism...not Saudi Arabia or the Gulf States

And the conflicts in places like Syria and Yemen are proxy wars between Iran and Saudi Arabia, its takes 2 sides to sustain these conflicts so its unhelpful to blame only one side 

 

[Elerond]

14 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

Oooooooh, the European posters are still harking back to the original hand signal. I should have figured that out (a fascist behind every bush?)   We used to just place our right hand over our heart.

It is communists that people fear 

Like for example Germany's Strafgesetzbuch section 86a which prohibit public showing of Nazi symbols was adopted during Cold War to block communists parties in West Germany as side effect it also bans Nazi symbols.

[Gfted1]

Now thats something I can get behind! I was raised to "kill a commie for mommy".

[Gromnir]

am frequent pointing out how lack o' education is the single greatest threat to the US.

example:

"Daddy needs; UBI, UHC, UFE and UFH."

and

"Now thats something I can get behind! I was raised to "kill a commie for mommy". "

we won't avoid the problems o' extremism w/o real education.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Gfted1]

. We need more 's.

[Gromnir]

free education: with two mirrors, you may create infinite clowns.

congrats.

HA! Good Fun!