Another Step by POTUS

[RonD1120 58]

https://www.oann.com/president-trump-withdraws-u-s-from-un-arms-trade-treaty/

[NWO]

Another step toward MAGA.

[Agenda 21] next?

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Yeah, because selling arms around the world, that are used to kill lots and lots of women and children is a good thing. 
It generates income for Trump's donors, so he gets lots of money.

And the people being killed are mostly 'brown people' in 'shithole countries', so it doesn't matter.

And it's also an entirely symbolic gesture. The Senate never ratified it, so the US was never a part of it.

Also, it only regulates international  trade. So the idea that it would affect US citizens obtaining arms inside the US is simply a lie. 

[yoink 321]

‘

10 hours ago, RonD1120 said:

https://www.oann.com/president-trump-withdraws-u-s-from-un-arms-trade-treaty/

[NWO]

Another step toward MAGA.

[Agenda 21] next?

Yup. The US, North Korea and Iran have now all refused to ratify the treaty... Ever heard the phrase ‘you can tell the kind of man you are by the company you keep.’? 

MAGA? Sure. Whatever.

[turtlespeed 212]

On 4/27/2019 at 7:47 PM, yoink said:

Ever heard the phrase ‘you can tell the kind of man you are by the company you keep.’? 

THAT is an interesting statement - 

I'm betting you have Hillary in High Regard . . . do you not?

Then there is this . . . .

 

 

ALMOST, but not quite . . . but the left is still pining that she wasn't elected - 

 

Then there is this kind of company - 

And this - 

 

[SkyDekker 1,121]

38 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

THAT is an interesting statement - 

I'm betting you have Hillary in High Regard . . . do you not?

Then there is this . . . .

 

 

ALMOST, but not quite . . . but the left is still pining that she wasn't elected - 

 

Then there is this kind of company - 

And this - 

 

 

LOL, you are posting at least 1 fake picture.

But I am sure it makes you feel good. We wouldn't want facts to interrupt anything.

[ryoder 1,381]

2nd photo is a photoshop job.

Story and original photo here: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-41821923

[yoink 321]

57 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

THAT is an interesting statement - 

I'm betting you have Hillary in High Regard . . . do you not?

 

 

You just don't get it do you?

These cheap little internet points that you keep trying to score are worthless here. I value some actual thought behind the posts. If you just want to post memes go to 4chan.

 

The phrase relates to people you choose to spend a lot of time with, and you know that. If you deliberately opt not to see a difference between that and meeting someone for a job and a poor photoshop in order to try and make a dig at me then you're an idiot.

I wouldn't judge you by people you meet as part of your job. I WOULD judge you if you chose to associate with murderers, terrorists and brutal dictators in your free time. That's what the US has done...

 

And for the record, AGAIN, not everyone who dislikes Trump must automatically hold Hillary in high regard. In just the same way that not everyone who hated Hillary enough to vote for Trump actually likes the fucker. It's a completely ridiculous argument.

You're wrong multiple times in a single post. Congrats.

 

 

Edited April 30, 2019 by yoink

[turtlespeed 212]

11 minutes ago, yoink said:

You just don't get it do you?

These cheap little internet points that you keep trying to score are worthless here. I value some actual thought behind the posts. If you just want to post memes go to 4chan.

 

The phrase relates to people you choose to spend a lot of time with, and you know that. If you deliberately opt not to see a difference between that and meeting someone for a job and a poor photoshop in order to try and make a dig at me then you're an idiot.

I wouldn't judge you by people you meet as part of your job. I WOULD judge you if you chose to associate with murderers, terrorists and brutal dictators in your free time. That's what the US has done...

 

And for the record, AGAIN, not everyone who dislikes Trump must automatically hold Hillary in high regard. In just the same way that not everyone who hated Hillary enough to vote for Trump actually likes the fucker. It's a completely ridiculous argument.

You're wrong multiple times in a single post. Congrats.

 

 

Yes - I DO get it -

Evidently that subject is sensitive to you.  I won't reference you in any more posts where I find what you say ironic and almost humorous.

 

I'll admit I didn't look at any back story on the Hillary and Osama pic - 

However - Meeting Farrakhan was something that Obama did many times.

That was before he was president - and i'd wager not really part of his job.

 

There are several encounters and dinner parties that Hillary and Trump and Bill all attended together - they USED to be friends.

My guess is that they still would be, had Trump not found a way to steal away her presidency.

 

I can admit where I was wrong - can you?

 

 

[gowlerk 1,903]

3 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

es - I DO get it -

Evidently that subject is sensitive to you.  I won't reference you in any more posts where I find what you say ironic and almost humorous.

Yup, you yanked his chain and he reacted. Good job.

[turtlespeed 212]

1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

Yup, you yanked his chain and he reacted. Good job.

If you say so.

[jakee 1,254]

7 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Then there is this . . . .

Are you really that stupid?

[jakee 1,254]

6 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

I'll admit I didn't look at any back story on the Hillary and Osama pic - 

Why would you need to? How clueless about recent world history are you?

[kallend 1,622]

On 4/30/2019 at 1:41 AM, jakee said:

Are you really that stupid?

That's a rhetorical question, right?  

[turtlespeed 212]

5 hours ago, kallend said:

That's a rhetorical question, right?  

Funny - I have been given "a break" for such comments - I guess I'm not a member if the club here.

[PhreeZone 15]

12 hours ago, jakee said:

Are you really that stupid?

Attacks against other posters are not allowed - final warning on this one.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

19 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

My guess is that they still would be, had Trump not found a way to steal away her presidency.

Threatening to lock somebody up is generally a decent way to end a friendship.

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

Threatening to lock somebody up is generally a decent way to end a friendship.

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree.

I wish he wasn't our best choice, but of the two presented at election time - we ended up with the just slightly better one.

[DJL 232]

Hey to be fair about the Bin Laden fake pictures, there's also this: 

https://www.businessinsider.com/1993-independent-article-about-osama-bin-laden-2013-12

[TriGirl 268]

On ‎4‎/‎27‎/‎2019 at 9:58 AM, wolfriverjoe said:

Yeah, because selling arms around the world, that are used to kill lots and lots of women and children is a good thing. 
It generates income for Trump's donors, so he gets lots of money.

And the people being killed are mostly 'brown people' in 'shithole countries', so it doesn't matter.

And it's also an entirely symbolic gesture. The Senate never ratified it, so the US was never a part of it.

Also, it only regulates international  trade. So the idea that it would affect US citizens obtaining arms inside the US is simply a lie. 

Really sad part is that it isn't only "brown people" in "shithole countries" being killed or injured with weapons the U.S. and other producers sell.  U.S. forces are also killed and injured by them, when the pretty easily make it into the hands of our enemies.  So, our continuing to sell weapons with the current "safety measures/regulations" in place is definitely the way to go.  No need to clean that up at all.  

[billvon 2,391]

16 minutes ago, TriGirl said:

Really sad part is that it isn't only "brown people" in "shithole countries" being killed or injured with weapons the U.S. and other producers sell.  U.S. forces are also killed and injured by them, when the pretty easily make it into the hands of our enemies.  So, our continuing to sell weapons with the current "safety measures/regulations" in place is definitely the way to go.  No need to clean that up at all.  

Only one answer to that - we need to sell more weapons to keep our troops safe! 9 out of 10 weapons manufacturers agree that it's the only sane answer.

[turtlespeed 212]

24 minutes ago, TriGirl said:

Really sad part is that it isn't only "brown people" in "shithole countries" being killed or injured with weapons the U.S. and other producers sell.  U.S. forces are also killed and injured by them, when the pretty easily make it into the hands of our enemies.  So, our continuing to sell weapons with the current "safety measures/regulations" in place is definitely the way to go.  No need to clean that up at all.  

And evidently Antifa thinks that as well.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46567/fbi-investigating-antifa-plotting-stage-armed-ashe-schow

[SkyDekker 1,121]

55 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

And evidently Antifa thinks that as well.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46567/fbi-investigating-antifa-plotting-stage-armed-ashe-schow

Maybe this time the NRA will alter its position on open carry again. Like they did when black people started openly carrying weapons. That wasn't quite what the NRA meant when they advocated for the right to bear arms.

[turtlespeed 212]

2 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Maybe this time the NRA will alter its position on open carry again. Like they did when black people started openly carrying weapons. That wasn't quite what the NRA meant when they advocated for the right to bear arms.

Sure it was - 

 

What does race have to do with Liberal extremists and Antifa though?

[DJL 232]

13 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

And evidently Antifa thinks that as well.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46567/fbi-investigating-antifa-plotting-stage-armed-ashe-schow

I don't know that an "anonymous source" from an article in "Daily Wire" is the best place to get your material from.  That's a fairly sensationalist newspaper.  Click through to the source article and it spends more time explaining why that report is very illogical.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

12 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Sure it was - 

Nah it wasn't. Otherwise they wouldn't have supported a ban on open carry in the 60's

 

What does a sensationalist piece without grounds have to do with US policy on international arms trade anyways?