independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Tue 28th Jan 2020 5:27pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Dumbest Piece of Shit ever LOL: Orange fat fuck admitting war crimes openly on Fox
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 01/13/20 8:16am

BombSquad

avatar

Dumbest Piece of Shit ever LOL: Orange fat fuck admitting war crimes openly on Fox

“Look what happened,” he said. “They’ve been fighting over that border for a thousand years. Why should we do it? And then they say ‘he left troops in Syria’. Do you know what I did? I left troops to take the oil. I took the oil – the only troops are protecting the oil.”

https://www.theguardian.c...-suleimani


this is just sooooo damn funny LMFAO

of course everyone with an ounce of brain left, knew since decades, that the US is just a fucking criminal shithole nation, starting illegal wars left and right and invading other countries just for profit, in most cases oil.

that is nothing new, has always been this way under all shithole presidents in decades. and of course quotes and dilaouges like above have always been exchanged behind closed doors.

but the fuckturd now is actually that dumb, that he slipped it out in the open. Duh! LMFAO


what an unhinged brainfart fucktwat LOL LOL LOL

you rock, fatfuck!




so for future debate at least he's given confirmation now to everyone, that all humanitarian reasons given in the past, bringing freedom, democracy, saving lives, weapons of mass destruction and all that shit, have always been phoney fake lies to deceive the dumbed down Fox fuckturds. anyone else using his brain always knew it anyway.




BHjyxEL.png

[Edited 1/13/20 8:19am]

Ideally speaking, the President of the United States and the dumbest person in the country would be two different people. Oh well.... money can't fix stupid
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 01/13/20 8:29am

noobman

Shouldn't there be consequences for him saying these things? Shouldn't other countries be doing something about these threats he's making?

He said he would take Iraq's oil also.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 01/13/20 8:39am

BombSquad

avatar

other countries do not have the military power. sadly.


it would be hightst time for Amercians themselves to take action now. maybe one of the crazy P.A.R.A.N.O.I..D.S. who've been collecting guns in their basment for exactly that case

"...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..."



Ideally speaking, the President of the United States and the dumbest person in the country would be two different people. Oh well.... money can't fix stupid
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 01/13/20 8:46am

noobman

Shouldn't statements like these be impeachable?

He's threatened to take Iraq and Syria's oil. Aren't these threats impeachable?

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 01/13/20 11:53am

KoolEaze

avatar

Well, at least he´s honest about it and doesn´t beat around the bush. lol

By the way....no, they have NOT been "fighting over that border for a thousand years".....that is nonsense. He doesn´t really seem to have a clue about the region and the parties involved.

But I appreciate his blunt approach.....at least you know who you´re dealing with.

" I´d rather be a stank ass hoe because I´m not stupid. Oh my goodness! I got more drugs! I´m always funny dude...I´m hilarious! Are we gonna smoke?"




http://kooleasehvac.com/
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 01/13/20 11:55am

KoolEaze

avatar

noobman said:

Shouldn't statements like these be impeachable?

He's threatened to take Iraq and Syria's oil. Aren't these threats impeachable?

Just proves that the saying "Might is right" is true.

" I´d rather be a stank ass hoe because I´m not stupid. Oh my goodness! I got more drugs! I´m always funny dude...I´m hilarious! Are we gonna smoke?"




http://kooleasehvac.com/
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 01/13/20 4:53pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

that is not the same as pillaging... but keep parroting stuff others have said... it works so well for you.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 01/14/20 2:13pm

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that is not the same as pillaging... but keep parroting stuff others have said... it works so well for you.

.

The irony of you, af all people, accusing anyone else of parroting is priceless.

.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia decision "Prosecutor v. Mucic et al." disagrees with what you have been told to say:

.

"it is to be observed that the prohibition against the unjustified appropriation of public and private enemy property is general in scope, and extends both to acts of looting committed by individual soldiers for their private gain, and to the organized seizure of property undertaken within the framework of a systematic economic exploitation of occupied territory."

.

Organised theft by a foreign military force certainly fits in the wide scope between pillaging, being individual theft by a soldier, and pillaging, being seizure of property for economic explotation by an occupying army.

[Edited 1/14/20 14:21pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 01/14/20 6:33pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that is not the same as pillaging... but keep parroting stuff others have said... it works so well for you.

.

The irony of you, af all people, accusing anyone else of parroting is priceless.

.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia decision "Prosecutor v. Mucic et al." disagrees with what you have been told to say:

.

"it is to be observed that the prohibition against the unjustified appropriation of public and private enemy property is general in scope, and extends both to acts of looting committed by individual soldiers for their private gain, and to the organized seizure of property undertaken within the framework of a systematic economic exploitation of occupied territory."

.

Organised theft by a foreign military force certainly fits in the wide scope between pillaging, being individual theft by a soldier, and pillaging, being seizure of property for economic explotation by an occupying army.

[Edited 1/14/20 14:21pm]

1) I parrot no one. i come up with my own comments and in this case we know BombSquad just took a meme...


2) protecting a nation's resources is not the same

See if you or BombSquad or the others would have considered for 3 seconds that maybe there was more to what was said... such as that the are protecting it and not that they have actual taken any.

So the meme is not accurate and some of the people hear are guilty of taking the word of a meme to confirm their bias.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 01/14/20 7:10pm

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

IanRG said:

.

The irony of you, af all people, accusing anyone else of parroting is priceless.

.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia decision "Prosecutor v. Mucic et al." disagrees with what you have been told to say:

.

"it is to be observed that the prohibition against the unjustified appropriation of public and private enemy property is general in scope, and extends both to acts of looting committed by individual soldiers for their private gain, and to the organized seizure of property undertaken within the framework of a systematic economic exploitation of occupied territory."

.

Organised theft by a foreign military force certainly fits in the wide scope between pillaging, being individual theft by a soldier, and pillaging, being seizure of property for economic explotation by an occupying army.

[Edited 1/14/20 14:21pm]

1) I parrot no one. i come up with my own comments and in this case we know BombSquad just took a meme...


2) protecting a nation's resources is not the same

See if you or BombSquad or the others would have considered for 3 seconds that maybe there was more to what was said... such as that the are protecting it and not that they have actual taken any.

So the meme is not accurate and some of the people hear are guilty of taking the word of a meme to confirm their bias.

.

Who told you to say you parrot no one? No one ignores the myriad of times that you state virtually word for word the latest spin so soon after it released.

.

If you considered the spin you parrot for just 3 seconds, you would realise it is not a meme, it was the words of trump: For a military force to be told to secure the oil and the president to say one of the reasons is to use this to argue for "fair" (trump's word not a meme) deal to get "reimbursement" (trump's word not a meme) for the US costs when they invaded Iraq is pillaging. It is no different from when Uganda was charged with using military force to pillage Rwanda's natural resources. For trump (not any meme) to say "We will negotiate a deal with whoever is claiming it [that] we think it is fair or we will militarily stop them very quickly" is to threaten to use military muscle to force a deal on the natural resources of a foriegn occupied land.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 01/15/20 9:13am

barnswallow

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

1) I parrot no one. i come up with my own comments and in this case we know BombSquad just took a meme...


2) protecting a nation's resources is not the same

See if you or BombSquad or the others would have considered for 3 seconds that maybe there was more to what was said... such as that the are protecting it and not that they have actual taken any.

So the meme is not accurate and some of the people hear are guilty of taking the word of a meme to confirm their bias.

.

Who told you to say you parrot no one? No one ignores the myriad of times that you state virtually word for word the latest spin so soon after it released.

.

If you considered the spin you parrot for just 3 seconds, you would realise it is not a meme, it was the words of trump: For a military force to be told to secure the oil and the president to say one of the reasons is to use this to argue for "fair" (trump's word not a meme) deal to get "reimbursement" (trump's word not a meme) for the US costs when they invaded Iraq is pillaging. It is no different from when Uganda was charged with using military force to pillage Rwanda's natural resources. For trump (not any meme) to say "We will negotiate a deal with whoever is claiming it [that] we think it is fair or we will militarily stop them very quickly" is to threaten to use military muscle to force a deal on the natural resources of a foriegn occupied land.

And, as we know, aspirations to be pillager-in-chief are not new for t----.

https://www.theguardian.c...izure-isis

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 01/15/20 1:52pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

1) I parrot no one. i come up with my own comments and in this case we know BombSquad just took a meme...


2) protecting a nation's resources is not the same

See if you or BombSquad or the others would have considered for 3 seconds that maybe there was more to what was said... such as that the are protecting it and not that they have actual taken any.

So the meme is not accurate and some of the people hear are guilty of taking the word of a meme to confirm their bias.

.

Who told you to say you parrot no one? No one ignores the myriad of times that you state virtually word for word the latest spin so soon after it released.

.

If you considered the spin you parrot for just 3 seconds, you would realise it is not a meme, it was the words of trump: For a military force to be told to secure the oil and the president to say one of the reasons is to use this to argue for "fair" (trump's word not a meme) deal to get "reimbursement" (trump's word not a meme) for the US costs when they invaded Iraq is pillaging. It is no different from when Uganda was charged with using military force to pillage Rwanda's natural resources. For trump (not any meme) to say "We will negotiate a deal with whoever is claiming it [that] we think it is fair or we will militarily stop them very quickly" is to threaten to use military muscle to force a deal on the natural resources of a foriegn occupied land.

any similarity between my posts (Unless I put it in quotes and give full credit with link if possible) and anything anyone said is pure coincidence. I defy you to present a single example. you can not do it because it never happened.

of course is was a meme... that is what a meme is... BombSquad did not bother to fact check... if anyone would have they would have found out he was talking about securing the oil fields...


No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 01/15/20 6:45pm

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

IanRG said:

.

Who told you to say you parrot no one? No one ignores the myriad of times that you state virtually word for word the latest spin so soon after it released.

.

If you considered the spin you parrot for just 3 seconds, you would realise it is not a meme, it was the words of trump: For a military force to be told to secure the oil and the president to say one of the reasons is to use this to argue for "fair" (trump's word not a meme) deal to get "reimbursement" (trump's word not a meme) for the US costs when they invaded Iraq is pillaging. It is no different from when Uganda was charged with using military force to pillage Rwanda's natural resources. For trump (not any meme) to say "We will negotiate a deal with whoever is claiming it [that] we think it is fair or we will militarily stop them very quickly" is to threaten to use military muscle to force a deal on the natural resources of a foriegn occupied land.

any similarity between my posts (Unless I put it in quotes and give full credit with link if possible) and anything anyone said is pure coincidence. I defy you to present a single example. you can not do it because it never happened.

of course is was a meme... that is what a meme is... BombSquad did not bother to fact check... if anyone would have they would have found out he was talking about securing the oil fields...


.

It always happens and is happening right now - you do it everytime. You have been called on it time and time and time again.

.

Trump's actual words are not memes even if someone quotes them in a meme - just as you parroting is also often in right wing memes before we see you repeat them here.

.

To move the topic off your accusation that others parrot whist you are parroting what you have been told: How is trump's public statement that he took the oil (being a natural resource on occupied foreign land) and he will negotiate a deal with whoever is claiming it that he thinks is fair or he will use militarily violence to stop them very quickly not pillaging? Please reference the legal definition you previously ignored.

[Edited 1/15/20 23:24pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 01/16/20 3:54am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

any similarity between my posts (Unless I put it in quotes and give full credit with link if possible) and anything anyone said is pure coincidence. I defy you to present a single example. you can not do it because it never happened.

of course is was a meme... that is what a meme is... BombSquad did not bother to fact check... if anyone would have they would have found out he was talking about securing the oil fields...


.

It always happens and is happening right now - you do it everytime. You have been called on it time and time and time again.

.

Trump's actual words are not memes even if someone quotes them in a meme - just as you parroting is also often in right wing memes before we see you repeat them here.

.

To move the topic off your accusation that others parrot whist you are parroting what you have been told: How is trump's public statement that he took the oil (being a natural resource on occupied foreign land) and he will negotiate a deal with whoever is claiming it that he thinks is fair or he will use militarily violence to stop them very quickly not pillaging? Please reference the legal definition you previously ignored.

[Edited 1/15/20 23:24pm]


i have been falsely called out and sometimes i ignore it for what it is (lack of ability to counter) sometimes I call it out as a fiction. You 1) made this up 2) imagined it or 3) are yourself parroting it... as you can not provided a single example you fail.

Yes: it was a few of Trump's words... a few selected words.

All I did was fined the full quote and there it was... he is protecting it.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 01/16/20 10:12am

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

IanRG said:

.

It always happens and is happening right now - you do it everytime. You have been called on it time and time and time again.

.

Trump's actual words are not memes even if someone quotes them in a meme - just as you parroting is also often in right wing memes before we see you repeat them here.

.

To move the topic off your accusation that others parrot whist you are parroting what you have been told: How is trump's public statement that he took the oil (being a natural resource on occupied foreign land) and he will negotiate a deal with whoever is claiming it that he thinks is fair or he will use militarily violence to stop them very quickly not pillaging? Please reference the legal definition you previously ignored.

[Edited 1/15/20 23:24pm]


i have been falsely called out and sometimes i ignore it for what it is (lack of ability to counter) sometimes I call it out as a fiction. You 1) made this up 2) imagined it or 3) are yourself parroting it... as you can not provided a single example you fail.

Yes: it was a few of Trump's words... a few selected words.

All I did was fined the full quote and there it was... he is protecting it.

.

You are parroting right now. I have not failed: You, in this thread, accused others of parroting by quoting trump and, at the same time you parroted the far right media spin on what trump said. If all it takes is one example for you admit this: this is one example of so very many examples of you parroting and I am using it without taking the thread off the topic. Discuss the topic and stop accusing others of doing what so many have shown you do regularly.

.

You are only using this to hide from the fact that more than just the picture in the OP has been discussed here (the miilitary threat for a deal, explanation of the definition of pillaging with reference to legal cases etc). That the far-right trump media told you to downplay trump's statement and merely parrot "he is protecting it" fails to address that trump said more than this. He had no right to protect it - It is not his country, it is not his resource, it was not the (stated) reason for his miliary being there in the first place, and he was withdrawing. He gave up any pretense to be a protector seeking to prevent an ISIS resurgence because he did not seek to protect the area from the ISIS prisoners that escaped as a result of his agreement with Turkey. He sold out one of his allies in the fight against ISIS in the process.

.

You accuse others of not looking at his complete words, but you have not looked at his complete words. His intent was not just to protect it: You continue to obfuscate and ignore that trump said he used military forces to take the oil so he could get a deal from the owners and further threatened to use military violence to force a more favourable deal for his country on the natural resources of a foreign occupied country - This is pillaging.

[Edited 1/16/20 10:15am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 01/17/20 3:18pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:


i have been falsely called out and sometimes i ignore it for what it is (lack of ability to counter) sometimes I call it out as a fiction. You 1) made this up 2) imagined it or 3) are yourself parroting it... as you can not provided a single example you fail.

Yes: it was a few of Trump's words... a few selected words.

All I did was fined the full quote and there it was... he is protecting it.

.

You are parroting right now. I have not failed: You, in this thread, accused others of parroting by quoting trump and, at the same time you parroted the far right media spin on what trump said. If all it takes is one example for you admit this: this is one example of so very many examples of you parroting and I am using it without taking the thread off the topic. Discuss the topic and stop accusing others of doing what so many have shown you do regularly.

.

You are only using this to hide from the fact that more than just the picture in the OP has been discussed here (the miilitary threat for a deal, explanation of the definition of pillaging with reference to legal cases etc). That the far-right trump media told you to downplay trump's statement and merely parrot "he is protecting it" fails to address that trump said more than this. He had no right to protect it - It is not his country, it is not his resource, it was not the (stated) reason for his miliary being there in the first place, and he was withdrawing. He gave up any pretense to be a protector seeking to prevent an ISIS resurgence because he did not seek to protect the area from the ISIS prisoners that escaped as a result of his agreement with Turkey. He sold out one of his allies in the fight against ISIS in the process.

.

You accuse others of not looking at his complete words, but you have not looked at his complete words. His intent was not just to protect it: You continue to obfuscate and ignore that trump said he used military forces to take the oil so he could get a deal from the owners and further threatened to use military violence to force a more favourable deal for his country on the natural resources of a foreign occupied country - This is pillaging.

[Edited 1/16/20 10:15am]

that is not true and not honest. you made it up... you can not back it up...sadly on this site one is allowed to make up false claims (sometimes even of federal crimes)...

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 01/17/20 4:12pm

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

IanRG said:

.

You are parroting right now. I have not failed: You, in this thread, accused others of parroting by quoting trump and, at the same time you parroted the far right media spin on what trump said. If all it takes is one example for you admit this: this is one example of so very many examples of you parroting and I am using it without taking the thread off the topic. Discuss the topic and stop accusing others of doing what so many have shown you do regularly.

.

You are only using this to hide from the fact that more than just the picture in the OP has been discussed here (the military threat for a deal, explanation of the definition of pillaging with reference to legal cases, etc). That the far-right trump media told you to downplay trump's statement and merely parrot "he is protecting it" fails to address that trump said more than this. He had no right to protect it - It is not his country, it is not his resource, it was not the (stated) reason for his military being there in the first place, and he was withdrawing. He gave up any pretense to be a protector seeking to prevent an ISIS resurgence because he did not seek to protect the area from the ISIS prisoners that escaped as a result of his agreement with Turkey. He sold out one of his allies in the fight against ISIS in the process.

.

You accuse others of not looking at his complete words, but you have not looked at his complete words. His intent was not just to protect it: You continue to obfuscate and ignore that trump said he used military forces to take the oil so he could get a deal from the owners and further threatened to use military violence to force a more favourable deal for his country on the natural resources of a foreign occupied country - This is pillaging.

[Edited 1/16/20 10:15am]

that is not true and not honest. you made it up... you can not back it up...sadly on this site one is allowed to make up false claims (sometimes even of federal crimes)...

.

No, it is fully backed up. Or are you saying the far-right trump media did not downplay trump's protection racket to take the oil and "protect it" whilst threatening to use the military to force the type of deal that would be pillaging under the international law? Are you saying it is all just your own spin? Wrong again - stop miss-using this site to make up false claims to excuse crimes.

.

No, there is not a single dishonest thing in anything I said. You are parroting. I have made up nothing - trump said it, this is beyond doubt. trump said more than you can admit to as it included the threat to use military force to force a deal on natural resources in an occupied foreign land. What you keep ignoring is the threat to use military force to get a deal on taken natural resources on occupied foreign land whilst accusing others of not looking at all that trump said. Despite your false claims, we did not just discuss the words in a picture - not even just within the OP. The action of threatening to use military to force a deal on taken and held natural resources in an occupied foreign land to get a good deal is pillaging under the law. Along with everything else I said, the law is not made up.

.

Your total lack of knowledge on law is constantly revealed every time you post on the law - The anti-pillaging law being discussed is not a federal crime: It is by international treaty, convention and agreement - it would initially be dealt with by a war crimes tribunal, not a US federal court.

.

Obviously, trump will never face such a war crimes tribunal for this boast about how he will pillage. Firstly, his keepers will have pointed out to him straight after the show that he can't do what he threatened to do. Based on his business and political history, the chances of him negotiating a deal, let alone a good one, even with a military threat to back it up are slim. Even if he succeeds, the US is very unlikely to ever be put before a war crimes tribunal regardless of how many war crimes it commits.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 01/17/20 5:20pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that is not true and not honest. you made it up... you can not back it up...sadly on this site one is allowed to make up false claims (sometimes even of federal crimes)...

.

No, it is fully backed up. Or are you saying the far-right trump media did not downplay trump's protection racket to take the oil and "protect it" whilst threatening to use the military to force the type of deal that would be pillaging under the international law? Are you saying it is all just your own spin? Wrong again - stop miss-using this site to make up false claims to excuse crimes.

.

No, there is not a single dishonest thing in anything I said. You are parroting. I have made up nothing - trump said it, this is beyond doubt. trump said more than you can admit to as it included the threat to use military force to force a deal on natural resources in an occupied foreign land. What you keep ignoring is the threat to use military force to get a deal on taken natural resources on occupied foreign land whilst accusing others of not looking at all that trump said. Despite your false claims, we did not just discuss the words in a picture - not even just within the OP. The action of threatening to use military to force a deal on taken and held natural resources in an occupied foreign land to get a good deal is pillaging under the law. Along with everything else I said, the law is not made up.

.

Your total lack of knowledge on law is constantly revealed every time you post on the law - The anti-pillaging law being discussed is not a federal crime: It is by international treaty, convention and agreement - it would initially be dealt with by a war crimes tribunal, not a US federal court.

.

Obviously, trump will never face such a war crimes tribunal for this boast about how he will pillage. Firstly, his keepers will have pointed out to him straight after the show that he can't do what he threatened to do. Based on his business and political history, the chances of him negotiating a deal, let alone a good one, even with a military threat to back it up are slim. Even if he succeeds, the US is very unlikely to ever be put before a war crimes tribunal regardless of how many war crimes it commits.

Not at all backed up...

I have no idea what any media outlet said about it...the first I had heard of it was the meme... I replied and then searched and found the full quote.

it is dishonest to make up things... and you did...

I take what he said as saying we are guarding it and will not let just anyone claim it. But you know there is what he said and what you made up...

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 01/17/20 5:46pm

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

IanRG said:

.

No, it is fully backed up. Or are you saying the far-right trump media did not downplay trump's protection racket to take the oil and "protect it" whilst threatening to use the military to force the type of deal that would be pillaging under the international law? Are you saying it is all just your own spin? Wrong again - stop miss-using this site to make up false claims to excuse crimes.

.

No, there is not a single dishonest thing in anything I said. You are parroting. I have made up nothing - trump said it, this is beyond doubt. trump said more than you can admit to as it included the threat to use military force to force a deal on natural resources in an occupied foreign land. What you keep ignoring is the threat to use military force to get a deal on taken natural resources on occupied foreign land whilst accusing others of not looking at all that trump said. Despite your false claims, we did not just discuss the words in a picture - not even just within the OP. The action of threatening to use military to force a deal on taken and held natural resources in an occupied foreign land to get a good deal is pillaging under the law. Along with everything else I said, the law is not made up.

.

Your total lack of knowledge on law is constantly revealed every time you post on the law - The anti-pillaging law being discussed is not a federal crime: It is by international treaty, convention and agreement - it would initially be dealt with by a war crimes tribunal, not a US federal court.

.

Obviously, trump will never face such a war crimes tribunal for this boast about how he will pillage. Firstly, his keepers will have pointed out to him straight after the show that he can't do what he threatened to do. Based on his business and political history, the chances of him negotiating a deal, let alone a good one, even with a military threat to back it up are slim. Even if he succeeds, the US is very unlikely to ever be put before a war crimes tribunal regardless of how many war crimes it commits.

Not at all backed up...

I have no idea what any media outlet said about it...the first I had heard of it was the meme... I replied and then searched and found the full quote.

it is dishonest to make up things... and you did...

I take what he said as saying we are guarding it and will not let just anyone claim it. But you know there is what he said and what you made up...

.

Fully backed up. Just because those that you parrot have taught you that constant denial and false accusation without discussion is an effective defence, it is not.

.

You are either lying when you say you looked up what was said on Fox News or that you have no idea what was said on that news outlet.

It is impossible for you to be right because you are constantly avoiding that trump was recorded and telecast as saying the quote where he threatened to use the military to force a "fair" deal on the return of the oil. You have to ignore this part of the trump said so you can form an opinion that 100% matches the exact opinion of very same people that you comments here so often match.

.

Don't say I always say you are wrong: Yes I do know what trump said and what I made up. He actually threatened to use the military to force a deal on oil he took with diverted military leaving the Syrian and Turkish border if he did not get a "fair" deal. In this, you know and I both know I made nothing up - you and those you parrot just want to push their opinion that was just a protection, not a protection racket.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 01/17/20 7:50pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

IanRG said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Not at all backed up...

I have no idea what any media outlet said about it...the first I had heard of it was the meme... I replied and then searched and found the full quote.

it is dishonest to make up things... and you did...

I take what he said as saying we are guarding it and will not let just anyone claim it. But you know there is what he said and what you made up...

.

Fully backed up. Just because those that you parrot have taught you that constant denial and false accusation without discussion is an effective defence, it is not.

.

You are either lying when you say you looked up what was said on Fox News or that you have no idea what was said on that news outlet.

It is impossible for you to be right because you are constantly avoiding that trump was recorded and telecast as saying the quote where he threatened to use the military to force a "fair" deal on the return of the oil. You have to ignore this part of the trump said so you can form an opinion that 100% matches the exact opinion of very same people that you comments here so often match.

.

Don't say I always say you are wrong: Yes I do know what trump said and what I made up. He actually threatened to use the military to force a deal on oil he took with diverted military leaving the Syrian and Turkish border if he did not get a "fair" deal. In this, you know and I both know I made nothing up - you and those you parrot just want to push their opinion that was just a protection, not a protection racket.

huh? what does that even mean? I saw the meme... I replied to what was in the meme... that was not piliaging... it could be... but it is not necessarily so. Then I googled what was quoted and found the video... the fact that he was on fox has nothing to do with it... and had nothing to do with how i formed my opnion or what i posted. that is you making up stuff.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 01/17/20 8:55pm

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

IanRG said:

.

Fully backed up. Just because those that you parrot have taught you that constant denial and false accusation without discussion is an effective defence, it is not.

.

You are either lying when you say you looked up what was said on Fox News or that you have no idea what was said on that news outlet.

It is impossible for you to be right because you are constantly avoiding that trump was recorded and telecast as saying the quote where he threatened to use the military to force a "fair" deal on the return of the oil. You have to ignore this part of the trump said so you can form an opinion that 100% matches the exact opinion of very same people that you comments here so often match.

.

Don't say I always say you are wrong: Yes I do know what trump said and what I made up. He actually threatened to use the military to force a deal on oil he took with diverted military leaving the Syrian and Turkish border if he did not get a "fair" deal. In this, you know and I both know I made nothing up - you and those you parrot just want to push their opinion that was just a protection, not a protection racket.

huh? what does that even mean? I saw the meme... I replied to what was in the meme... that was not piliaging... it could be... but it is not necessarily so. Then I googled what was quoted and found the video... the fact that he was on fox has nothing to do with it... and had nothing to do with how i formed my opnion or what i posted. that is you making up stuff.

.

You are only making your position and process worse.

.

You would have us believe that you knew nothing about it but never-the-less before you knew anything, you stated unequivocally that it was not pillaging. Now you say that when you said that, it could have been pillaging. Either this is wrong and you did know what you were supposed to be parroting or it this is spin by assumption before you had any facts. Either way it shows partisanship before integrity.

.

Then, just as I said, you went to the Fox video to get the story and it is at this point you parroted the far-right media spin that "its just for protection" line. Thank you for confirming the timeline of what I said you did. It confirms that I made up nothing.

.

Now that you have confirmed what I said was not made up, let's see if you can move on to what you keep ignoring:

.

I note that you are solely focused on denying your parroting of Fox and not on the fact that in the process you detailed above, you should have heard/read trump state his protection racket tactic by his threat to use military violence to force a "fair" deal on natural resources in occupied foreign country - or, in shorthand, by the legal definition USA follows: a form of pillaging. trump said "I like the oil, we're keeping the oil" and he wants it as fair reimbursement, just as he said in regard to the Iraqi oil as a reimbursement for the US invading Iraq.

[Edited 1/18/20 11:30am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Dumbest Piece of Shit ever LOL: Orange fat fuck admitting war crimes openly on Fox