....
He's proud of getting the guy fired because it was something that the rest of the G8 and most of our allies were already pushing for. It was a victory for us and a defeat for Russia.
If that's true, then that's exactly what Zelensky will report to Trump or Guiliani. Fine with me. But I certainly wouldn't take your word for it. I think I'd like to hear it from Zelensky. Do you have any problem with that? (I don't care if you do or do not, just curious.) |
|
|
|
Briefly stated, you have "subpoena" correct and those you argue with do not. I don't know WHY this argument is going on. This is very simple stuff. As mentioned, a congressional body / committee might issue a request - a letter - and then if they didn't get what they want, they could issue a subpoena. |
|
|
|
It's exactly fair, because in the cases cited and thousands more, the Muslims claim at the time of doing their atrocities, and later in Court, that they were doing it in defense of / for their God.
Certainly in the west things are quite imperfect, but in the case of an atrocity happening here it is almost non-existent that someone will claim they did it for their God. (Unless, of course, the perp is a Muslim...)
Anyone can say what they wanted but it doesn't mean the religion wanted to do things.So if someone is doing harmful things for any human they are doing haram which means it is not accepted by God. "Religion wanted?" The religion is not an AI that speaks in each case. The best your religion can do is have "experts" issue Fatwas. And you know some of those are batshit crazy. We can go into that subject if you want. All you really have is imperfect humans reading an old book and interpreting it. You're here only to spread propaganda, practice Takiyya and attempt to handle various anti-Islam arguments (some of which are very unjust). But meanwhile, your faith has many deep and serious problems. Ignore them if you wish. Makes no difference with me... Basically I am not an expert in what Islam says,I just expressing what I know and learnt from my fellow Muslims. I don't think Islam doesn't made any leaders,they were just messengers Isn't it? Some people still out there as saying they are leaders but I never heard what they were saying because I need to live my life for good. I can tell you one thing, if you want respect in and with Westerners, drop all the Takiyya. Takiyya? What's that.Google says its pillow.  Westerners, although they certainly do lie, view it about at the same level as someone pointing the soles of his shoes at you ( I think I have that right). |
|
|
|
It's ironic that people are now complaining about the confidential hearings. The republicans have bitched and moaned about hearings being public many times as recently as last month.
It does makes sense to not want the person you're investigating, or the witnesses you're questioning to know what you know until all the facts have been gathered. This makes it a lot more difficult to know what you can get away with lying about. Not to mention the witnesses don't have to worry being attacked by the president, his army of trolls and right wing media for being a "rat".
Again, as far back as I know, you or I or virtually any US citizen could walk right into one of these committee hearings, sit down and watch all of it. Meanwhile, all of it is put on CSPAN and is available right then. The exceptions of course involve classified material hearings. Going "secret" is a major, major change. |
|
|
|
It's exactly fair, because in the cases cited and thousands more, the Muslims claim at the time of doing their atrocities, and later in Court, that they were doing it in defense of / for their God.
Certainly in the west things are quite imperfect, but in the case of an atrocity happening here it is almost non-existent that someone will claim they did it for their God. (Unless, of course, the perp is a Muslim...)
Anyone can say what they wanted but it doesn't mean the religion wanted to do things.So if someone is doing harmful things for any human they are doing haram which means it is not accepted by God. "Religion wanted?" The religion is not an AI that speaks in each case. The best your religion can do is have "experts" issue Fatwas. And you know some of those are batshit crazy. We can go into that subject if you want. All you really have is imperfect humans reading an old book and interpreting it. You're here only to spread propaganda, practice Takiyya and attempt to handle various anti-Islam arguments (some of which are very unjust). But meanwhile, your faith has many deep and serious problems. Ignore them if you wish. Makes no difference with me... Basically I am not an expert in what Islam says,I just expressing what I know and learnt from my fellow Muslims. I don't think Islam doesn't made any leaders,they were just messengers Isn't it? Some people still out there as saying they are leaders but I never heard what they were saying because I need to live my life for good. I can tell you one thing, if you want respect in and with Westerners, drop all the Takiyya. |
|
|
|
I've watched the video, and Joe Biden appears pretty proud of how he pushed that guy around.
He is and he exagerates about it as well. But it's still not proof of what is being claimed. We've already discussed the need or lack of, and the misdirection of claiming a need for "proof." So anything you have to say on the matter is worthless cause you only deal in opinion, feelings and theories. Gotcha. Actually I have the opposite point of view, that your petty continual demands for "proof" cause anything you say on the matter to be worthless. Particularly since Trumps asking their leader to look into the matter is so terribly objectionable to the left. I guess if you favor obfuscating and stalling any attempt to get at the truth, while continually demanding proof, some people might think you were a pretty smart dude. I'd say that's just bullshit legal tactics. |
|
|
|
Not because of this issue, but over the last two years he's gone off the deep end. Of course you and your ilk would say that. As soon as someone doesn't tow the party line you pile on. Hey. That's exactly what the left does. Go figure. You're all the same. Side note.. He does have some "interesting" ideas on some things that's for sure. FYI, the guy describes himself as libertarian, not Republican, and I've followed him for twenty years. And gave you my opinion of some recent changes he's shown. |
|
|
|
It's exactly fair, because in the cases cited and thousands more, the Muslims claim at the time of doing their atrocities, and later in Court, that they were doing it in defense of / for their God.
Certainly in the west things are quite imperfect, but in the case of an atrocity happening here it is almost non-existent that someone will claim they did it for their God. (Unless, of course, the perp is a Muslim...)
Anyone can say what they wanted but it doesn't mean the religion wanted to do things.So if someone is doing harmful things for any human they are doing haram which means it is not accepted by God. "Religion wanted?" The religion is not an AI that speaks in each case. The best your religion can do is have "experts" issue Fatwas. And you know some of those are batshit crazy. We can go into that subject if you want. All you really have is imperfect humans reading an old book and interpreting it. You're here only to spread propaganda, practice Takiyya and attempt to handle various anti-Islam arguments (some of which are very unjust). But meanwhile, your faith has many deep and serious problems. Ignore them if you wish. Makes no difference with me... |
|
|
|
I've watched the video, and Joe Biden appears pretty proud of how he pushed that guy around.
He is and he exagerates about it as well. But it's still not proof of what is being claimed. We've already discussed the need or lack of, and the misdirection of claiming a need for "proof." |
|
|
|
It's pretty clear you have pledged total and blind allegiance to Trump
You mean "Dear Leader". ... ridiculous image deleted ... Mis direction is a debate tactic used when you've already lost the factual argument The thread title is ... Re: Vid of Biden admit bribe of Ukrainian Pres. to fire prosecutor investigating son I've watched the video, and Joe Biden appears pretty proud of how he pushed that guy around. |
|
|
|
...
His vision isn't impossible. But the time period in which the aim is impossible. ...
So he's lying. Let's keep it simple. |
|
|
|
....AI is going to make voice recordings useless as proof and then deep fakes will finish it off for videos and we'll all be fucked.
No. We'll be back where we were before recordings, when a person's word as to what he saw or heard is proof. And the word of an AI is never trusted. Maybe I wasn't clear with what I meant. AI/tech will soon be able to perfectly mimic a persons voice so that it's indistinguishable from the real thing. Voice recordings, pictures, video recordings... they'll all be just as useless as a fallible persons "word". I heard exactly what you said and heard a talk and read the speaker's paper in 2017 about exact voice mimicking. So reality's quite a way ahead of you. Now go back and reread what I said refuting your conclusions about these advances. You didn't refute anything but just made statement without any reasoning. Wrong. I provided a complete rebuttal to your assertion. Let me repeat it, since apparently you didn't get it. ASSERTED: AI is going to make voice recordings useless as proof and then deep fakes will finish it off for videos and we'll all be fucked. REBUTTED: No. We'll be back where we were before recordings, when a person's word as to what he saw or heard is proof. And the word of an AI is never trusted. |
|
|
|
....
By the way, it's not "secretive". The republicans on the committees are in those interviews. They have the same amount of time to asked questions and the proceedings will be made public.....
Umm, it most certainly is. Ever been in a Senate or House committee hearing? You just walk in, unless all the seats are taken. by people waiting all night (that's typical for the politically interesting hearings, but most are not). Bar that and the live CSPAN (also installed in all those rooms) and you've got the very definition of SECRETIVE. Ok, if you say so. My perspective is that if I can read a transcript or whatever after the fact then I don't view it as secret. Fact is, I prefer they do things behind closed doors cause as soon as they do it for the cameras, it just becomes a circus wasting everyones time. The only thing that matters is seeing the transcripts after the fact. Actually, it matters a great deal whether committee meetings are open or secret. Now you are arguing something like "Whatever my team does is right and I'll defend it." Most likely the reasoning behind secret is to amass a pack of lies and then dump it at a strategic moment for political effect. Since this has been backfiring on the Dems now they will try doing it covertly and dumping the package at a carefully timed moment. Say three days before the election, with insufficient time to respond. That's what your lying liars do and what you defend. As for the rest of your argument with Tecshare I don't have a clue what you are trying to get at. Vaguely, sort of, that everything Pelosi is doing is okay? Is that your POV?
What is she doing that isn't ok? Care to provide some information. And I don't mean "opinion" as to what may or may not be wrong. I mean actually legally wrong. Cause as far as the political optics of it, one can sit here and point fingers at both sides on a whole lot of different things over the years cause they all suck. Tecshare has made a bunch of claims, all so far based on opinion. We're discussing those claims. [/quote] You are not going to be able to win that argument by taking refuge in what is "legal." As you have seen, there are various forum members that can easily debate the details of the legal arguments. As I pointed out, the obvious outcome of Pelosi breaking all the rules is the senate with the "sole ability to try the impeachment" just giving Pelosi one big raised middle finger. And that's not "an opinion," rather it's a POSSIBLE OUTCOME. |
|
|
|
Islam is a religion of love and peace.
Tell me this isn't sarcasm.  It's not sarcasm, but it is an excellent example of Takkiya, in which a Muslim repeatedly lies to create what he thinks is a positive effect for his religion. In the West we typically consider such things propaganda. But the lying is encouraged by the religion. Quite curious. The actual reality is the Islam has a brutal and violent past, present and future. The first two examples are of an extreme view, the third of a "moderate view." https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7571743/Afghan-stabbed-two-American-tourists-Amsterdam-jailed-26-years.html'He never showed any regret or remorse during his trial, repeatedly saying he would do the same again if his religion was insulted,' the judges said. 'The risk of a repeat offence is therefore very high and the court finds it essential that society is protected against him as long as possible.' During his trial at a heavily-fortified courtroom, Jawed S. said he travelled to the Netherlands from Germany to 'protect the Prophet Mohammed.'http://www.startribune.com/bangladesh-court-indicts-islamist-militants-for-2015-killing/562979392/In October 2015, suspected militants hacked Faisal Abedin Deepan of the Jagriti Prokashoni publishing house. On the same day, another publisher, Ahmed Rashid Tutul, survived an attack by suspected militants in Dhaka, Bangladesh's capital. Both victims were publishers of Bangladeshi-American writer and blogger Avijit Roy, who was hacked to death in February 2015.https://www.memri.org/tv/uk-cleric-usamah-thahabi-liverpool-thief-cut-off-hand-cauterize-oil-sharia-ilhan-omar-gay-pride-flexible/transcriptU.K. Cleric Abu Usamah At-Thahabi: I Support Chopping Off Hands of Thieves, , But Only in the Muslim World, Not Here. Sheikh At-Thahabi went on to say that there is no room for "flexibility" in Islam with regard to homosexuals, lesbians, and transgender people, and he added that Muslims cannot break the law and harm these people. I don't understand something,when someone with muslim name commited criminal offence their religion will get highlighted but with other religion people this thing is not happening,why like this? It is unfair though? It's exactly fair, because in the cases cited and thousands more, the Muslims claim at the time of doing their atrocities, and later in Court, that they were doing it in defense of / for their God. Certainly in the west things are quite imperfect, but in the case of an atrocity happening here it is almost non-existent that someone will claim they did it for their God. (Unless, of course, the perp is a Muslim...) |
|
|
|
....AI is going to make voice recordings useless as proof and then deep fakes will finish it off for videos and we'll all be fucked.
No. We'll be back where we were before recordings, when a person's word as to what he saw or heard is proof. And the word of an AI is never trusted. Maybe I wasn't clear with what I meant. AI/tech will soon be able to perfectly mimic a persons voice so that it's indistinguishable from the real thing. Voice recordings, pictures, video recordings... they'll all be just as useless as a fallible persons "word". I heard exactly what you said and heard a talk and read the speaker's paper in 2017 about exact voice mimicking. So reality's quite a way ahead of you. Now go back and reread what I said refuting your conclusions about these advances. |
|
|
|
....
By the way, it's not "secretive". The republicans on the committees are in those interviews. They have the same amount of time to asked questions and the proceedings will be made public.....
Umm, it most certainly is. Ever been in a Senate or House committee hearing? You just walk in, unless all the seats are taken. by people waiting all night (that's typical for the politically interesting hearings, but most are not). Bar that and the live CSPAN (also installed in all those rooms) and you've got the very definition of SECRETIVE. As for the rest of your argument with Tecshare I don't have a clue what you are trying to get at. Vaguely, sort of, that everything Pelosi is doing is okay? Is that your POV? |
|
|
|
Islam is a religion of love and peace.
Tell me this isn't sarcasm. It's not sarcasm, but it is an excellent example of Takkiya, in which a Muslim repeatedly lies to create what he thinks is a positive effect for his religion. In the West we typically consider such things propaganda. But the lying is encouraged by the religion. Quite curious. The actual reality is the Islam has a brutal and violent past, present and future. The first two examples are of an extreme view, the third of a "moderate view." https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7571743/Afghan-stabbed-two-American-tourists-Amsterdam-jailed-26-years.html'He never showed any regret or remorse during his trial, repeatedly saying he would do the same again if his religion was insulted,' the judges said. 'The risk of a repeat offence is therefore very high and the court finds it essential that society is protected against him as long as possible.' During his trial at a heavily-fortified courtroom, Jawed S. said he travelled to the Netherlands from Germany to 'protect the Prophet Mohammed.'http://www.startribune.com/bangladesh-court-indicts-islamist-militants-for-2015-killing/562979392/In October 2015, suspected militants hacked Faisal Abedin Deepan of the Jagriti Prokashoni publishing house. On the same day, another publisher, Ahmed Rashid Tutul, survived an attack by suspected militants in Dhaka, Bangladesh's capital. Both victims were publishers of Bangladeshi-American writer and blogger Avijit Roy, who was hacked to death in February 2015.https://www.memri.org/tv/uk-cleric-usamah-thahabi-liverpool-thief-cut-off-hand-cauterize-oil-sharia-ilhan-omar-gay-pride-flexible/transcriptU.K. Cleric Abu Usamah At-Thahabi: I Support Chopping Off Hands of Thieves, , But Only in the Muslim World, Not Here. Sheikh At-Thahabi went on to say that there is no room for "flexibility" in Islam with regard to homosexuals, lesbians, and transgender people, and he added that Muslims cannot break the law and harm these people. |
|
|
|
It will be possible someday but dates like 2025 are absurd. The technology to move enough resources to mars to start a colony of a million people won't even be available in our lifetimes. We barely have the technology to get there and back alive as visitors. Its all just a fantasy based excuse for people who don't want to take care of the one planet we have that we are perfectly adapted to live on.
So Elon Musk having a vision of achieving an impossible thing? I heard there is another space land in 2020 which is not going to bring any live matter to the Mars so five years enough to make the place as living condition? His vision isn't impossible. But the time period in which the aim is impossible. Because 5 years is like a flash of an eye in terms of such huge milestones, in 5 years technology moves about a millimetre high where as miles are needed in tech advancements to achieve such feats. But hopes should never die! Musk's goal is to convince the population of his goals, then to get money from the government. |
|
|
|
... it is clear bayaha HIV virus, the source of the HIV virus is caused by women....
This statement is wrong, go look it up. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
