Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Giant 'Trump Baby' could fly over London for president's visit

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by JakeScully View Post
    This was actually founded by a bunch of leftists and not by the “city of London”. Their money. If anything they are wasting their £££.

    I find this neither offensive or hilarious. Trump has mastered his trollish ways on Twitter and Admittedly sometimes can be amusing - why shouldn’t British leftists troll him back? Fair is fair.
    Right on, fair game! But it seems part of the game is to act like football players acting out for penalty card. What's good for the goose is good for the gander I say, or "part and parcel" as gaz would say

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Devil Child View Post
      London Mayor Sadiq Khan balloon planned to counter 'Trump baby' blimp in London



      http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/07...in-london.html

      Well isn't that special. All the offended conservative snowflakes can fly their balloon to counter liberal snowflake's tantrum balloon. Everyone wins and everyone looks stupid.
      Nice try but these are completely different. The former is an immature attempt at childishly insulting a head of state. The latter is legitimate criticism of a liberal farty pants butt face.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by gaz View Post

        Are you familiar with the entire quote, rather than the three words that appeared in headlines?
        I am, and even though Khan was way less curt and cavalier about it than Trump's son painted him to be, it was still a brain fart in my books. And I took offense even though I don't even live in London, simply 'cause Khan's championship of this mindset makes it more likely to spread and lo! spread it does. "You're more likely to die in a car accident than at the hands of terrorists", EU commission president Jean-Claude Juncker told a group of conservative MEPs yesterday. Why ain't that a relief.

        In my estimation, the government doesn't get to say "sorry, we can't do anything about it". Not when it comes to the basics, not with so many potentially viable suggestions cast off the table for reasons of political correctness. The state has no single more important purpose than to protect the life and the rights of its citizens and it has no business telling people to ignore the risk some fanatic twat might come along and cut their head off, however small it might be.

        This is so nasty a mindset especially considering that no one ever said anything of the like about IRA, ETA or Baader-Meinhof. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Islamic terrorists generally don't seem to target politicians and government figures. The response would be different by orders of magnitude.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
          Nice try but these are completely different. The former is an immature attempt at childishly insulting a head of state. The latter is legitimate criticism of a liberal farty pants butt face.
          Says you california

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by muck View Post

            I am, and even though Khan was way less curt and cavalier about it than Trump's son painted him to be, it was still a brain fart in my books. And I took offense even though I don't even live in London, simply 'cause Khan's championship of this mindset makes it more likely to spread and lo! spread it does. "You're more likely to die in a car accident than at the hands of terrorists", EU commission president Jean-Claude Juncker told a group of conservative MEPs yesterday. Why ain't that a relief.

            In my estimation, the government doesn't get to say "sorry, we can't do anything about it". Not when it comes to the basics, not with so many potentially viable suggestions cast off the table for reasons of political correctness. The state has no single more important purpose than to protect the life and the rights of its citizens and it has no business telling people to ignore the risk some fanatic twat might come along and cut their head off, however small it might be.

            This is so nasty a mindset especially considering that no one ever said anything of the like about IRA, ETA or Baader-Meinhof. Maybe that's one of the reasons why Islamic terrorists generally don't seem to target politicians and government figures. The response would be different by orders of magnitude.
            I genuinely have no idea what you're talking about.

            Every time I read the following quote, I don't understand why people are freaked out about it.

            “Part and parcel of living in a great global city is you’ve got to be prepared for these things, you’ve got to be vigilant, you’ve got to support the police doing an incredibly hard job. We must never accept terrorists being successful, we must never accept that terrorists can destroy our life or destroy the way we lead our lives.”

            Comment


            • #36
              I'll give you a counter example.

              There has recently been a couple of high profile rape and murdered of women in Sydney and Melbourne.

              No politican has dared say anything about it being routine crime in a big city and especially about women being vigilant.

              Comment


              • #37
                He didn't say terrorism was routine. He said being prepared for it was, which frankly, in the UK is true. I grew up through the 80s when IRA bombs went off with alarming regularity. We all had it drilled into us to look out for unattended bags in public which could be bombs. You still get those posters in public places now.
                But we also didn't let it change the way we lived our lives. Which is also what Khan said.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Kilgor & Gaz

                  Kilgor's right, even though his example would (in my estimation) be less egregious a thing to say for crime is a human constant. Terrorism is not. There are so many "great global" cities and entire countries for whose citizens "being prepared" isn't part and parcel of living there.
                  If you can't find fault with what Khan had said – oh well. Admittely I don't know what else to say.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by gaz View Post
                    Every time I read the following quote, I don't understand why people are freaked out about it.
                    Because Fox tells them to be.

                    People spend a lot of time on forums like these parsing words that frankly speak for themselves. Khan meant what he said. There's really only one obvious way to understand it, but because he's on the right's shit-list apparently his words have to be reinterpreted to mean something either delusional or sinister.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      So basically he said: Keep calm and carry on.

                      However he did say it while being brown, which can be seen as a deliberate provocation if you're full-fringed red-pilled.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by gaz View Post

                        Not going to lie - I don't get your argument. Yes, there's crime in London - what do you want private citizens to spend their money on? Batsuits so they can become vigilantes and fight crime on their own?
                        Dibs on green arrow

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          moronic...just more free ads for Trump...

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X