Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


Trump's easing in week.

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 17, 18, 19 ... 23, 24, 25  Next
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:55 - 18 Mar 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

M.C wrote:

Clapping Brilliant.

After years of investigation by Clintonites in the highest (or lowest) levels of their Deep State, they've still been unable to pin any Russia-Russia-Russia collusion on Trump. And yet they remain obsessed with it, as though there's still a smoking 45-minute-WMD to be found if they just! Keep! Believing!

Trump Derangement Syndrome writ large (note that the top definition is an example of Trump Derangement Syndrome).
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:51 - 22 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trump refers to MS-13 animals as animals.

Legacy media REEEEEEEES that despite the preceding sentence in the conversation being specifically about MS-13, that what the God Emperor was really thinking is that all "undocumented immigrants" are animals therefore racist Hitler how verydare and even if it was about MS-13 which it wasn't then you can't call anyone an animal even if "kill, rape, control" is their literal mott-

Official White House Press Release: "What You Need To Know About The Violent Animals Of MS-13"

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/need-know-violent-animals-ms-13/

#Winning
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
- This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.

Falco
Traffic Copper



Joined: 27 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:37 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
Did I just hear that right on the radio news?

A court has has banned Trump from blocking trolls from his Twitter account, because it "violates their right to free speech"?

OK, so this court has just allowed a small group of anti-Trump snowflakes to win their case and has now given every snowflake on the planet the right to sabotage his Twitter account. Way to go.....

Quote:
Among those who brought the case was Maryland university professor Philip Cohen, who was blocked last year after posting an image of the president with words "corrupt, incompetent authoritarian".


What next, the public allowed into parliament/congress/Whitehouse to heckle? Trump's private phone number to be handed out to all snowflakes and he must answer and can't block them?

The world has gone mad. Liberal snowflakes are everywhere and changing society and the rules without even being in power. It appears the law is being used a lot lately by snowflakes to enforce their world views on people. Think GollyWog cases and Count Dankula and his girfriend's Nazi Pug.



No. He isn't supposed to block people anymore (not that there will be any enforcement). He can still mute them.

That's it. The rest of your post is complete nonsense.

EDIT: I misread the ruling. He actually *can* still block people, just not for their viewpoint alone. He can still mute anyone he pleases.
____________________
I tell you what, mathematically, I'm having it
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
- This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.

Falco
Traffic Copper



Joined: 27 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:41 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
And of course, you'd be perfectly happy to have a law brought in stopping you from blocking people on social media?

Get out of it. I don't believe you.

What about his human rights? You know, like a right to privacy, when he chooses?


If I were president of the US, using twitter as a public forum to make official announcements? I'd be happy with it. My happiness would be immaterial however, by using my twitter in an official role, those responding are granted 1A rights.

Right to privacy? If he wants to run a twitter account as trump (the man, not the president) he would be perfectly within his rights to block whoever he wanted.
____________________
I tell you what, mathematically, I'm having it
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:52 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, I see nukular war with North Korea is back on.

Cup of tea?
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
- This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.

Falco
Traffic Copper



Joined: 27 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:05 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
Haters got to hate eh?

How very grown up of the Snowflakes who threw their toys out of the pram for not being allowed to whine, abuse and publicly mock the president of the USA.


The only snowflake here is Trump, who can't bear to see any opinion that isn't his own. So much so that it's not enough to stop hearing them (via the mute function), he is actually trying to stop them seeing his presidential twitter communications (via the block function).

If anyone is *actually* abusive, it is completely acceptable to block them, what the court has said is that he cannot block people ON THE BASIS OF THEIR OPINION.

Apparently not being able to ban people whose opinions he doesn't like is a terrible imposition though Rolling Eyes
____________________
I tell you what, mathematically, I'm having it
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

cdlxxvi
Nearly there...



Joined: 13 Feb 2012
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:50 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

And just when American taxpayers paid for this beauty...

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/998649651824865282/z96LFSV4?format=jpg&name=600x314

... it all just sails away: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/24/trump-says-singapore-summit-with-north-korea-leader-kim-is-cancelled-.html

Crying or Very sad

Definitely not the outcome we expected from a lone amateur taking on a bunch of seasoned thugs, right? We are all BIGLY surprised here?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:00 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Falco wrote:
what the court has said is that he cannot block people ON THE BASIS OF THEIR OPINION.

That's not quite what they said.

"a public official may [not] block” a person from his Twitter account [...] in response to the political views that person has expressed".

Commencify protected political trolling of all public officials, including judges, I assume.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

M.C
Super Spammer



Joined: 29 Sep 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 19:57 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

cdlxxvi wrote:
And just when American taxpayers paid for this beauty...

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/998649651824865282/z96LFSV4?format=jpg&name=600x314

... it all just sails away: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/24/trump-says-singapore-summit-with-north-korea-leader-kim-is-cancelled-.html

Crying or Very sad

Definitely not the outcome we expected from a lone amateur taking on a bunch of seasoned thugs, right? We are all BIGLY surprised here?

Squawking when the talks were on, squawking now they're off, sounds like every Trump story for the last two years Smile
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

doggone
World Chat Champion



Joined: 20 May 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:26 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's probably a wise move considering the increasingly belligerent comments.
They will likely come back with a better attitude, don't forget it's China is pushing them to change.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

Suntan Sid
World Chat Champion



Joined: 07 May 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:35 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
Haters got to hate eh?

How very grown up of the Snowflakes who threw their toys out of the pram for not being allowed to whine, abuse and publicly mock the president of the USA.


Turns out they were right though, doesn't it?

This is what the judgement actually says:-

Quote:
This case requires us to consider whether a public official
may, consistent with the First Amendment, “block” a person from
his Twitter account in response to the political views that person
has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public
official is the President of the United States. The answer to
both questions is no.


Whether you like it or not, the ruling has got sod all to do with, whatever today's buzzword is for people you don't agree with. It is a constitutional issue, an issue that turns out to be in violation of the first amendment.

I'm no great fan of the US of A, however they have a legally binding constitution. You can whine about it all you want, try and blame it on people who have differing opinions from you and use all the usual buzzwords to describe them. The fact is it's a point of law.
____________________
"Everybody needs money, that's why they call it money!" Cool
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

M.C
Super Spammer



Joined: 29 Sep 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:45 - 24 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Suntan Sid wrote:
Quote:
This case requires us to consider whether a public official
may, consistent with the First Amendment, “block” a person from
his Twitter account in response to the political views that person
has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public
official is the President of the United States. The answer to
both questions is no.


Whether you like it or not, the ruling has got sod all to do with, whatever today's buzzword is for people you don't agree with. It is a constitutional issue, an issue that turns out to be in violation of the first amendment.

I'm no great fan of the US of A, however they have a legally binding constitution. You can whine about it all you want, try and blame it on people who have differing opinions from you and use all the usual buzzwords to describe them. The fact is it's a point of law.


You're right:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances even if in hundreds of years that consists of directing an angry electronic communication towards the president.

How did they know to add that last bit Shocked
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

M.C
Super Spammer



Joined: 29 Sep 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 01:18 - 25 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44244687 - apparently Obama didn't want to do it Smile
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Falco
Traffic Copper



Joined: 27 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 08:30 - 25 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rogerborg wrote:
Falco wrote:
what the court has said is that he cannot block people ON THE BASIS OF THEIR OPINION.

That's not quite what they said.

"a public official may [not] block” a person from his Twitter account [...] in response to the political views that person has expressed".

Commencify protected political trolling of all public officials, including judges, I assume.



Fair point. That was imprecise language usage on my part, if someone's opinion is that Trump is an arsehole they can still be legitimately blocked for tweeting that at him.

Minor correction though, political trolling has to be kept to "official" twitter accounts, other than that anything goes. It'll keep the office intern occupied muting the noisy trolls, for a few days.
____________________
I tell you what, mathematically, I'm having it
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
- This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.

Falco
Traffic Copper



Joined: 27 Nov 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:11 - 25 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:

Personally, I think it's bizarre that a court has decided that one of the hate targets for the left has been denied the right to stop those haters from trolling him.
Who decides the difference between "a different political opinion" and "acting like a twat" on his social media account? I should imagine the boundary would be pretty hard to define.


It's a good thing the court decided no such thing then, isn't it. For someone who unironically uses the term "snowflake" you seem awfully concerned about Trump having a safe space free from differing opinions.

Once more, he CAN block trolls and he can legitimately mute people whose political views he doesn't like, he just can't block them.

It's really quite simple to tell the difference. "Trump you fuck-stick, your behaviour in Iran is totally myopic" - not protected, though it includes political views, it is abusive and is thus fair game for blockage. real world example
"Trump, you are an incompetent leader, your behaviour in Iran is totally myopic" - protected, not abusive, expressive of a political view. real world example

But even if his skin is so thin he can't bear to see people disagree with him he can still mute them.
____________________
I tell you what, mathematically, I'm having it
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:11 - 25 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

He can mute them biglier than anyone has ever muted anyone before. We're going to mute all the violent animals, it's going to be great.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
- This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.

Itchy
Super Spammer



Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 19:00 - 25 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://i.redd.it/4084m00euzz01.jpg
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Suntan Sid
World Chat Champion



Joined: 07 May 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 19:49 - 25 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
Ah, so the constitution is all about allowing haters to hate on social media.


No, the constitution, in the US, is legally binding!

mpd72 wrote:
Gotcha. Clear as mud, never realised that's why it was written.


Whatever, what does this even mean?

mpd72 wrote:
Personally, I think it's bizarre that a court has decided that one of the hate targets for the left has been denied the right to stop those haters from trolling him.


The alternative is called a dictatorship!

mpd72 wrote:
Who decides the difference between "a different political opinion" and "acting like a twat" on his social media account? I should imagine the boundary would be pretty hard to define.


Err, the boundary has, obviously, been defined within the ruling being discussed.
____________________
"Everybody needs money, that's why they call it money!" Cool
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:56 - 26 May 2018    Post subject: Reply with quote

doggone wrote:
[NorKor] will likely come back with a better attitude, don't forget it's China is pushing them to change.

We're talking to them [North Korea] now. It was a very nice statement they put out.

Stable genius FTW.

Only Trump can go to NorKor.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
- This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 5 years, 309 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 17, 18, 19 ... 23, 24, 25  Next
Page 18 of 25

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.27 Sec - Server Load: 0.38 - MySQL Queries: 17 - Page Size: 160.72 Kb