NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

One superpower is already in war mode.

Iran and Israel is a minute by minute proposition.

2 superpowers are on opposing sides of that conflict.

China will side with Russia.

All parties have nuclear capability.

The US has 2 complete morons running the show and funding a war against Russia.

Moron A doesn’t possess a functioning brain and Moron B talks in word salad.

We’re on the brink.
1*sZBb2HSoJblCLhEc3a3kyA.jpeg


Back under the bed buttercup, it'll be ok :tearsofjoy:
 
Kinda. Since Donnie boy is saying Kamala isn't black, he now can't accept she is either. Obviously some kind of syndrome-based derangement going on.

Bit weird for someone who apparently is no fan of Trump but here we are lol

Quite clearly her skin tone is brown.

You have to be utterly ****ed in the head to argue it's not.
 
Iran and Israel is a regional conflict.

The rest of the ME aren't keen on joining in.

Especially given most don't have any close relationships with Iran. In some cases the opposite.

China won't waste large pools of resources on Russia. They will give them lip service for the greater part.

It's chicken little talk to think all these nations who have no appetite for war are all of a sudden going to jump into conflicts and create a world war.
This err... isn't quite the repartee he was looking for mate :tearsofjoy:

Easty at least PM the bloke a script or something next time, sheesh
 
Iran and Israel is a regional conflict.

The rest of the ME aren't keen on joining in.

Especially given most don't have any close relationships with Iran. In some cases the opposite.

China won't waste large pools of resources on Russia. They will give them lip service for the greater part.

It's chicken little talk to think all these nations who have no appetite for war are all of a sudden going to jump into conflicts and create a world war.

The great man is the only one talking peace and ending wars.

Bostonian what do you make of the lefties continually telling us World War 3 will start IF Trump wins the election.

Malifice has expressed fears Trump will set off a 'literal' NAZI apocalypse.

Are we in a no win situation here mate? This could be the guns of august all over again.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

3 year olds in the US also know that Obama and Harris are 'black' ;)

This is so awesome, more I say, MOAR!! I am never going to let you stop talking about this :tearsofjoy:

The US education system is ****ed though.

Many of them think Wakanda is a real place.

So putting your lot in with that height of intelligence says a lot about you.

You'll ignore what your eyes can see to pander.

Brave man.
 
Look man. Kamala has already explained all this:

“Well, I think culture is — it is a reflection of our moment in our time, right? And — and present culture is the way we express how we’re feeling about the moment. And — and we should always find times to express how we feel about the moment that is a reflection of joy, because every — you know, it comes in the morning. (Laughs) We have to find ways to also express the way we feel about the moment in terms of just having language and a connection to how people are experiencing life. And I think about it in that way, too.”

No doubt we will see that quote in one of those lists of motivational quotes - alongside Einsten and Da Vinci - one often sees about the place:

“Culture is a reflection of our moment in our time. And in present culture it is the way we express how we’re feeling about the moment” - Kamala Devi Harris.
 
No, that's not how it works.

You don't need 'Aboriginal DNA' (whatever that is) to be Aboriginal.

You need:

1) Descent (usually biological, but not necessarily biological)
2) Self identification
3) Community acknowledgement
Sure, that's the modern interpretation.

But like the modern interpretation of racism which requires "structural inequalities" for someone to be racist, or like the modern interpretation of gender which de-couples sex and gender, but uses gender where sex should be used... the modern interpretation is wrong.
 
Sure, that's the modern interpretation.

That's the scientific interpretation.

I know you blokes struggle with science (climate change, evolution, vaccine efficacy, peer review etc) but there it is.

But like the modern interpretation of racism which requires "structural inequalities" for someone to be racist,

No, all people are saying here is that it's self evidently wrong to equate 'black on white' racism as being = to 'white on black racism'.

If White people in the USA had a history of being enslaved by Blacks, then disenfranchised till the Civil Rights era, subject to a Black version of KKK, rampant and entrenched discrimination etc, the inverse would be true.

Why do you cookers ignore that context and try and draw an obviously false equivalence?

or like the modern interpretation of gender which de-couples sex and gender

Hang on.

You think gender identity is linked to biological sex?

You think boys wear blue and girls wear pink due to 'genetics'?
 
Obama is black, he was raised as 'black'. Kamala is not, she was raised as indian.

You campaigners really flip flop.

One minute you're claiming some kind of 'biological reality' to gender.

Next minute you're asserting a woman with a literal Black father, is not black, because 'she wasn't raised that way' biological reality be damned.

Can you see the obvious logical disconnect between those two positions?
 
Have to go ahead and stick up for bonbons here.

He may be a simpleton but he's OUR simpleton.

Top Contributor :thumbsu:
Likewise mate, I do have to give you some credit here - would have thought you'd ride in to give Bostonian a quick reach around on this by now, kudos for avoiding.

Oi Bostonian, when even Easty thinks your shtick is too moronic to defend it might be time for a re-think I reckon :tearsofjoy:
 
Magnificent.

There are quite a few brown people in America that have been called 'black' with no issues right up until last week, I wonder what changed :tearsofjoy:

Nothing changed.

There's just ****wits who can't tell the difference between two colours.

As always you're like a fly on shit over something I'm guessing Trump said.

I have no idea what he said and really don't care. Unlike obsessed you.
 
That's the scientific interpretation.

I know you blokes struggle with science (climate change, evolution, vaccine efficacy, peer review etc) but there it is.



No, all people are saying here is that it's self evidently wrong to equate 'black on white' racism as being = to 'white on black racism'.

If White people in the USA had a history of being enslaved by Blacks, then disenfranchised till the Civil Rights era, subject to a Black version of KKK, rampant and entrenched discrimination etc, the inverse would be true.

Why do you cookers ignore that context and try and draw an obviously false equivalence?



Hang on.

You think gender identity is linked to biological sex?

You think boys wear blue and girls wear pink due to 'genetics'?
You sound hilarious when you try and explain these demented post-modern, post-truth concepts.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top