OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[swaledale]

How so?

That's a question AF will find difficult to answer RA, he tires to be clever, fails, ties himself up in knots and contradictions and then generally goes silent or deflects.

[swaledale]

Also interesting that your hypocricy extends to supporting the words of a spokesman of a belief system you have repeatedly stated you don't believe in

Its spelt hypocrisy by the way!

There is a big difference between agreeing with or recognising the value of certain ideas, philosophies or words spoken by some body and buying into the elaborate and many times changed and modified BS which organised religions have in multiple different versions indoctrinated people with over the years.

You seem to have missed the point that its what was said, not who said it, that's important. Which is ironic given you are nearly always accusing myself and RA of having a narrow view based on dogma and yet when he demonstrates he hasn't, you call him a hypocrite!

[Ram Pant]

You are of course referring to the increasing interference by the right wing Christian Nationalists in the US, who are actively supporting and encouraging far right groups in Europe. This threat is now amplified by the recent "strategy" document published by the Current US Government, which repeats far right tropes and falsehoods.

Worrying times indeed when one of the most powerful nations in the world, is attempting to use its economic power to influence and in some cases appear to be trying to force changes in other democratic countries, using lies, falsehoods and conspiracy theories that have been debunked many times.

Worrying that Trump shows no sign of recognising the rule of law, only the rule of power and strength and what's economically advantageous to himself and his lackeys.

And to think that some thought the danger to our society and political system was from Muslims!!

Heard an intersting thought yesterday. Trump is disengaging from Europe and likely to leave NATO, leaving us to our own devices. Thereby triggering a change in "how the world is run". Rather than by the rule of Law and dome decency, the rich and powerful will take over. He wants to be the "Mob Boss" running the Americas, taking advantage of Venezuelan oil etc, the gas and oil recently found in Dutch prtotectorate Suriname etc. China can rule the roost over SE Asia incl. Taiwan and, it seems, Japan as well. Russia will take control of its former bloc and also get no interference from Trump if it invades the EU which he thinks is bankrupt and falling apart.

Not a concept that appeals to me.

[Ram Pant]

Its spelt hypocrisy by the way!

Always amusing to see someone correcting someone else when they themselves make frequent spelling and grammatical errors.

In the "corrective" post, its should be it's.

Ammy has corrected you many a time and oft on there, their and they're amongst other faux pas.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Heard an intersting thought yesterday. Trump is disengaging from Europe and likely to leave NATO, leaving us to our own devices. Thereby triggering a change in "how the world is run". Rather than by the rule of Law and dome decency, the rich and powerful will take over. He wants to be the "Mob Boss" running the Americas, taking advantage of Venezuelan oil etc, the gas and oil recently found in Dutch prtotectorate Suriname etc. China can rule the roost over SE Asia incl. Taiwan and, it seems, Japan as well. Russia will take control of its former bloc and also get no interference from Trump if it invades the EU which he thinks is bankrupt and falling apart.

Not a concept that appeals to me.

So in this model we would have the equivalent of Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia all in a shifting state of constant war and changing alliances? Just that the scenario has evolved some 50 years later than predicted. Here on Airstrip 1 things may not be great but I suspect it might be worse in the Cloggietown part of Eurasia?

NB I didnt realise Surinam was still a Dutch protectorate?

[Ram Pant]

So in this model we would have the equivalent of Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia all in a shifting state of constant war and changing alliances? Just that the scenario has evolved some 50 years later than predicted. Here on Airstrip 1 things may not be great but I suspect it might be worse in the Cloggietown part of Eurasia?

NB I didnt realise Surinam was still a Dutch protectorate?

.. including having Willem Alexander as King.

[ramAnag]

Heard an intersting thought yesterday. Trump is disengaging from Europe and likely to leave NATO, leaving us to our own devices. Thereby triggering a change in "how the world is run". Rather than by the rule of Law and dome decency, the rich and powerful will take over. He wants to be the "Mob Boss" running the Americas, taking advantage of Venezuelan oil etc, the gas and oil recently found in Dutch prtotectorate Suriname etc. China can rule the roost over SE Asia incl. Taiwan and, it seems, Japan as well. Russia will take control of its former bloc and also get no interference from Trump if it invades the EU which he thinks is bankrupt and falling apart.

Not a concept that appeals to me.

Given that, God forbid, the unthinkable happens, then on the evidence of Russia’s difficulty in overcoming Ukrainian resistance it seems unlikely that Putin’s forces would have the power to defeat a united Europe with or without the support of the current U.S. luna…sorry…leader.

Makes one realise how important a united Europe is and how much Brexit damaged that concept, something some of us argued all along. Perhaps Mr. Farage, a known admirer of Mr. Putin and a great ally of President Trump had this in mind way back in 2016.

[Andy_Faber]

Always amusing to see someone correcting someone else when they themselves make frequent spelling and grammatical errors.

In the "corrective" post, its should be it's.

Ammy has corrected you many a time and oft on there, their and they're amongst other faux pas.

Thanks for pointing that out, I’d noticed that earlier along with turning somebody (one word) into some body (two words).

Maybe Swale needs to be reminded of the definition of hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case. You hit the bullseye Swale.

[Geoff Parkstone]

.. including having Willem Alexander as King.

Amazing how wrong AI can be, claiming that "kingery" ended in 1975 when of course it was queenery...

[Ram Pant]

Amazing how wrong AI can be, claiming that "kingery" ended in 1975 when of course it was queenery...

In fact Willem Alexander has just completed a 3 day State visit there.

[ramAnag]

Strange how you side with such a one-sided sentence, regretably Swales' words and your agreement are a significant part of the emerging and possibly existential problem.

Anyway…over 24 hours on…any chance of you clarifying your above observation at the second time of asking?

[Geoff Parkstone]

Anyway?over 24 hours on?any chance of you clarifying your above observation at the second time of asking?

if this helps "An existential problem, often called an existential crisis, is a deep inner conflict where you question life's meaning, your purpose, identity, and freedom, leading to feelings of anxiety, emptiness, or dread, often triggered by major life events or a sense of meaninglessness. These struggles grapple with big questions like "Why are we here?" and "What's the point?" but, while challenging, can also be a chance to find more authentic values and purpose"

Perhaps AF is questioning his own purpose in life in relation to Swale's dubious comments and your accession to them, in the sense of being joined at the hip. Me? I dont profess an opinion but in the spirit of seasonal goodwill engendered by the little black palestininan woman born 2025 years ago later this month I will but agree with you

[ramAnag]

if this helps "An existential problem, often called an existential crisis, is a deep inner conflict where you question life's meaning, your purpose, identity, and freedom, leading to feelings of anxiety, emptiness, or dread, often triggered by major life events or a sense of meaninglessness.

Thanks, GP. I fully recognise your expertise in the area of meaninglessness however I was rather hoping for AF’s own clarification.

[swaledale]

Thanks for pointing that out, I’d noticed that earlier along with turning somebody (one word) into some body (two words).

Maybe Swale needs to be reminded of the definition of hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case. You hit the bullseye Swale.

I rather think it's you who need to understand the definition, given that RA wasn't and didn't claim to
have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.

But agreed that IF many of those who claimed to be Christians, actually observed the teachings of Jesus, the world would be a nicer place and also expressed his agreement with the message somebody had communicated, in this case a church leader, which you seemed to think odd due to his admission that he was not a supporter of that belief system.

Which is far less odd than you, a self professed Christian, expressing xenophobic and racist views that are incompatible with the belief system you claim to follow.

Funnily enough, there are those of us who are able to understand that even where one might disagree with an overall philosophy, that doesn't mean that every thing it contains is not worth further examination or have some validity.

As for me hitting the bullseye, my correction was a tongue in cheek dig at your propensity to have a dig at me, rather than attempt in anyway to address the issues of the post. An approach which Messrs Farage and Trump often use when being asked questions that they would either rather not or cannot answer.

I consider it an honour to be labelled a hypocrite by an apologist for fascists who is having uttered the immortal phrase "good bullying" is apparently unable to define what he means by it.

[swaledale]

Always amusing to see someone correcting someone else when they themselves make frequent spelling and grammatical errors.

In the "corrective" post, its should be it's.

Ammy has corrected you many a time and oft on there, their and they're amongst other faux pas.

Its always amusing when someone fails to recognise a tongue in cheek dig, in response to the fact that the poster (as does another on here) being corrected, more often than not attacks the grammar, the way something has been posted or the source of the information and completely ignores the proposition being put forward.