Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Egypt gets its first democratically elected head of state, and then...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36775035

"Egypt's security services have forcibly disappeared and tortured hundreds of people in the past year in an effort to wipe out dissent, a rights group says.

Students, political activists and protesters - some as young as 14 - have vanished without a trace, according to a new report by Amnesty International.

Many are alleged to have been held for months and often kept blindfolded and handcuffed for the entire period.
Egypt's government has denied it uses enforced disappearances and torture.

Interior Minister Magdy Abdul Ghaffar has insisted the security services operate within a framework established by Egyptian law.

More than 1,000 people have been killed and 40,000 are believed to have been jailed since President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi led the military's overthrew of Mohammed Morsi, Egypt's first democratically-elected head of state, in 2013."



Yup, Obama says that Egypt needs to have freedom and elections. We didn't get the person we wanted...so we help the Egyptian military produce a coup.

All of this, of course, was planned when Hillary was Secretary of State.

Since then, people have disappearing and been killed for speaking out against the Egyptian government (yeah, the one we support after all of our talk of freedom).

So much for Hillary believing in freedom and supporting minority rights.

Hillary lies, people die.










But...but...Trump is mean.

Que JSO and the other hilldog fanbois on how this is somehow good experience that makes her qualified for the WH.

I don't know about all that other stuff, but I do remember Obama giving some kind of speech about rainbows or somesuch in Cairo back in the early days of his presidency.

CID1990 wrote:I don't know about all that other stuff, but I do remember Obama giving some kind of speech about rainbows or somesuch in Cairo back in the early days of his presidency.

IIRC, the Arab Spring and "democracy spreading across the Middle East".

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

DSUrocks07 wrote:

CID1990 wrote:I don't know about all that other stuff, but I do remember Obama giving some kind of speech about rainbows or somesuch in Cairo back in the early days of his presidency.

IIRC, the Arab Spring and "democracy spreading across the Middle East".

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

It was transformative!

He has had a lot of those moments, according to many of my colleagues

SDHornet wrote:Que JSO and the other hilldog fanbois on how this is somehow good experience that makes her qualified for the WH.

Dback and......?

DSUrocks07 wrote:

CID1990 wrote:I don't know about all that other stuff, but I do remember Obama giving some kind of speech about rainbows or somesuch in Cairo back in the early days of his presidency.

IIRC, the Arab Spring and "democracy spreading across the Middle East".

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

I think his speech in Cairo happened before Arab Spring. But I'm sure he sounded quite Bush like.

kalm wrote:

SDHornet wrote:Que JSO and the other hilldog fanbois on how this is somehow good experience that makes her qualified for the WH.

Dback and......?

oooo

Do you guys not realize that Trump has been running around lately saying we should have left all the totalitarian regimes that were in power killing off, torturing, etc.? Now, I'll admit that before that he was saying we should depose them. But lately he's basically taken the position that it would've been cool to leave Saddam in power because he whacked terrorists and same sort of thing with Quadaffi.

I'm not getting why you guys think you've got something with this.

SDHornet wrote:Que JSO and the other hilldog fanbois on how this is somehow good experience that makes her qualified for the WH.

Actually it is. She actually has experience with having to deal with such situations. Having experience doesn't mean everything always turned out great. It means that you have actually been out there doing stuff in the area of concern and learning from it.

Trump has zero experience in this area. He is pure peanut gallery who says one thing before something is done then with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight changes his position and acts like he never said what he said before the decision was made. You know, like saying he supported the Iraq invasion beforehand and now saying he was aggressive in opposing it and saying he wanted our military to take Quaddifi out in Lybia then saying after the fact that it was a mistake to take Quaddafi out.

He does seem to get away with that kind of crap though. I'll give him that.

JohnStOnge wrote:Do you guys not realize that Trump has been running around lately saying we should have left all the totalitarian regimes that were in power killing off, torturing, etc.? Now, I'll admit that before that he was saying we should depose them. But lately he's basically taken the position that it would've been cool to leave Saddam in power because he whacked terrorists and same sort of thing with Quadaffi.

I'm not getting why you guys think you've got something with this.

With Sadam I think you can make an arguement for either way. He was a brutal dictator, a bit of a nut job, had low level WMD, was seeking more. But he was also a Sunni bulwark against Shiite Iran. Now ISIS has moved in and Iraq is a f'ing mess. Maybe democracy will work there, but things don't look good.

Trump is absolutely right on Quadaffi, and he's one of many Republicans who say we shouldn't have assisted in toppling him. Quadaffi was a brutal SOB dictator, but we had sort of turned him into our SOB dictator. After he saw us topple Sadam he gave up his WMD program. And Obama and Hildacunt decided to work to have him overthrown, which resulted in a power vacuum, civil war, and ISIS moving in. Trump is absolutely right we should have left Quadaffi in power..

Same with Assad. Brutal dictator. Obama and Hildacunt tried to have him toppled. Well guess who is fighting ISIS in Syria? Assad..

Bottom line is who gives a fuck if these brutal dictators are torturing & killing their people. As long as we can turn them into our SOBs, get them to act in our interests, and let them know if they step out of line (aid terrorists who attack us or aid our enemies) we'll bomb the shit out of em, we shouldn't try to topple them.

BDKJMU wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:Do you guys not realize that Trump has been running around lately saying we should have left all the totalitarian regimes that were in power killing off, torturing, etc.? Now, I'll admit that before that he was saying we should depose them. But lately he's basically taken the position that it would've been cool to leave Saddam in power because he whacked terrorists and same sort of thing with Quadaffi.

I'm not getting why you guys think you've got something with this.

With Sadam I think you can make an arguement for either way. He was a brutal dictator, a bit of a nut job, had low level WMD, was seeking more. But he was also a Sunni bulwark against Shiite Iran. Now ISIS has moved in and Iraq is a f'ing mess. Maybe democracy will work there, but things don't look good.

Trump is absolutely right on Quadaffi, and he's one of many Republicans who say we shouldn't have assisted in toppling him. Quadaffi was a brutal SOB dictator, but we had sort of turned him into our SOB dictator. After he saw us topple Sadam he gave up his WMD program. And Obama and Hildacunt decided to work to have him overthrown, which resulted in a power vacuum, civil war, and ISIS moving in. Trump is absolutely right we should have left Quadaffi in power..

Same with Assad. Brutal dictator. Obama and Hildacunt tried to have him toppled. Well guess who is fighting ISIS in Syria? Assad..

Bottom line is who gives a **** if these brutal dictators are torturing & killing their people. As long as we can turn them into our SOBs, get them to act in our interests, and let them know if they step out of line (aid terrorists who attack us or aid our enemies) we'll bomb the **** out of em, we shouldn't try to topple them.

Well, if all that's true the following statement shouldn't concern us:

Egypt's security services have forcibly disappeared and tortured hundreds of people in the past year in an effort to wipe out dissent, a rights group says.

Is it ever a choice between democracy and despotism in the middle east? Or just a choice between Arabic Nationalists and Islamic Theocrats?

JohnStOnge wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
With Sadam I think you can make an arguement for either way. He was a brutal dictator, a bit of a nut job, had low level WMD, was seeking more. But he was also a Sunni bulwark against Shiite Iran. Now ISIS has moved in and Iraq is a f'ing mess. Maybe democracy will work there, but things don't look good.

Trump is absolutely right on Quadaffi, and he's one of many Republicans who say we shouldn't have assisted in toppling him. Quadaffi was a brutal SOB dictator, but we had sort of turned him into our SOB dictator. After he saw us topple Sadam he gave up his WMD program. And Obama and Hildacunt decided to work to have him overthrown, which resulted in a power vacuum, civil war, and ISIS moving in. Trump is absolutely right we should have left Quadaffi in power..

Same with Assad. Brutal dictator. Obama and Hildacunt tried to have him toppled. Well guess who is fighting ISIS in Syria? Assad..

Bottom line is who gives a **** if these brutal dictators are torturing & killing their people. As long as we can turn them into our SOBs, get them to act in our interests, and let them know if they step out of line (aid terrorists who attack us or aid our enemies) we'll bomb the **** out of em, we shouldn't try to topple them.

Well, if all that's true the following statement shouldn't concern us:

Egypt's security services have forcibly disappeared and tortured hundreds of people in the past year in an effort to wipe out dissent, a rights group says.

It is a concern when Hillary says that we should respect the rights of all people.

That is lie where people die.

JohnStOnge wrote:

SDHornet wrote:Que JSO and the other hilldog fanbois on how this is somehow good experience that makes her qualified for the WH.

Actually it is. She actually has experience with having to deal with such situations. Having experience doesn't mean everything always turned out great. It means that you have actually been out there doing stuff in the area of concern and learning from it.

Trump has zero experience in this area. He is pure peanut gallery who says one thing before something is done then with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight changes his position and acts like he never said what he said before the decision was made. You know, like saying he supported the Iraq invasion beforehand and now saying he was aggressive in opposing it and saying he wanted our military to take Quaddifi out in Lybia then saying after the fact that it was a mistake to take Quaddafi out.

He does seem to get away with that kind of crap though. I'll give him that.

Can you provide the quotes that show Trump saying what you say he said?

JohnStOnge wrote:

SDHornet wrote:Que JSO and the other hilldog fanbois on how this is somehow good experience that makes her qualified for the WH.

Actually it is. She actually has experience with having to deal with such situations. Having experience doesn't mean everything always turned out great. It means that you have actually been out there doing stuff in the area of concern and learning from it.

Trump has zero experience in this area. He is pure peanut gallery who says one thing before something is done then with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight changes his position and acts like he never said what he said before the decision was made. You know, like saying he supported the Iraq invasion beforehand and now saying he was aggressive in opposing it and saying he wanted our military to take Quaddifi out in Lybia then saying after the fact that it was a mistake to take Quaddafi out.

He does seem to get away with that kind of crap though. I'll give him that.

Barney Fife had experience with having to deal with law enforcement situations. That doesn't mean I'd vote for him to be sheriff.

JohnStOnge wrote:Do you guys not realize that Trump has been running around lately saying we should have left all the totalitarian regimes that were in power killing off, torturing, etc.? Now, I'll admit that before that he was saying we should depose them. But lately he's basically taken the position that it would've been cool to leave Saddam in power because he whacked terrorists and same sort of thing with Quadaffi.

I'm not getting why you guys think you've got something with this.

Yes, and I agree with him on these points.

As pragmatic about other things as you are, I am surprised you don't agree too- think of it as Trump's version of "dogs are not humans so I should not care what happens to them"....

The world is not a safe place for Americans because we have been determined to make it safe for people of other countries. Trump is suggesting that we should act in our own interests in all things and I agree with him on that. It is also the position of the Libertarian Party, although Gary Johnson would not paint it the same way Trump does, the policy implications are the same. We do not interfere in other countries' affairs.

If you agree that we should be decapitating the leadership of other countries when we deem them to be "oppressive" then yes, Hillary is your gal.

CID1990 wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:Do you guys not realize that Trump has been running around lately saying we should have left all the totalitarian regimes that were in power killing off, torturing, etc.? Now, I'll admit that before that he was saying we should depose them. But lately he's basically taken the position that it would've been cool to leave Saddam in power because he whacked terrorists and same sort of thing with Quadaffi.

I'm not getting why you guys think you've got something with this.

Yes, and I agree with him on these points.

As pragmatic about other things as you are, I am surprised you don't agree too- think of it as Trump's version of "dogs are not humans so I should not care what happens to them"....

The world is not a safe place for Americans because we have been determined to make it safe for people of other countries. Trump is suggesting that we should act in our own interests in all things and I agree with him on that. It is also the position of the Libertarian Party, although Gary Johnson would not paint it the same way Trump does, the policy implications are the same. We do not interfere in other countries' affairs.

If you agree that we should be decapitating the leadership of other countries when we deem them to be "oppressive" then yes, Hillary is your gal.

JSO takes one in the ass with no lube yet again.

Cluck U wrote: Can you provide the quotes that show Trump saying what you say he said?

Yes but I thought you'd seen them before. Here's the audio of him saying "I guess so" to Howard Stern asking him if he supported invading Iraq. This was prior to the invasion:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir-bExYRnkE[/youtube]

You just have to listen to the first minute.

Now the Lybia thing:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuvZQMY9WNw[/youtube]

He's a lying sack of shit. You need to come to grips with that. If you want to support him even though he is a lying sack of shit, fine. But do so knowing that he is a lying sack of shit.

CID1990 wrote: As pragmatic about other things as you are, I am surprised you don't agree too- think of it as Trump's version of "dogs are not humans so I should not care what happens to them"....

The world is not a safe place for Americans because we have been determined to make it safe for people of other countries. Trump is suggesting that we should act in our own interests in all things and I agree with him on that. It is also the position of the Libertarian Party, although Gary Johnson would not paint it the same way Trump does, the policy implications are the same. We do not interfere in other countries' affairs.

If you agree that we should be decapitating the leadership of other countries when we deem them to be "oppressive" then yes, Hillary is your gal.

Trump is not sane. You are talking about putting someone who has serious emotional stability and maturity problems into that position. I just can't believe you really want to do that.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Cluck U wrote: Can you provide the quotes that show Trump saying what you say he said?

Yes but I thought you'd seen them before. Here's the audio of him saying "I guess so" to Howard Stern asking him if he supported invading Iraq. This was prior to the invasion:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir-bExYRnkE[/youtube]

You just have to listen to the first minute.

Now the Lybia thing:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuvZQMY9WNw[/youtube]

He's a lying sack of ****. You need to come to grips with that. If you want to support him even though he is a lying sack of ****, fine. But do so knowing that he is a lying sack of ****.

She's a lying sack of ****. You need to come to grips with that. If you want to support her even though she is a lying sack of ****, fine. But do so knowing that she is a lying sack of ***..

See how easy that is..

But but Trump tells more lies than Hillary..but but Politifact..

JohnStOnge wrote:
Yes but I thought you'd seen them before. Here's the audio of him saying "I guess so" to Howard Stern asking him if he supported invading Iraq. This was prior to the invasion:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir-bExYRnkE[/youtube]

You just have to listen to the first minute.

Now the Lybia thing:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuvZQMY9WNw[/youtube]

He's a lying sack of shit. You need to come to grips with that. If you want to support him even though he is a lying sack of shit, fine. But do so knowing that he is a lying sack of shit.

THAT is all you have?

Holy crap...you think a, "Yeah...I guess so..." is a ringing endorsement of getting rid of Saddam?



And, you have to remember (but you don't want to) that Trump didn't have access to intelligence, as did members of our Senate. He was also going on what the public was being told.

FAIL on the Saddam thing, John.

On the Qadaffi part...were you listening? Surgical strike. Not, "Hey, let's fund and arm completely unvetted whack jobs and cause a civil war."

And...here it comes...he mentioned that Qadaffi was killing his people and it would be one of the worst events in human history.

Hmmmm...wonder where Trump go that false narrative? FROM HILLARY.

So, you are blaming Trump for having an opinion based upon the LIES of Hillary and the LIES of the establishment.

Wow, John, you are a whack job of the highest order.

JohnStOnge wrote:

CID1990 wrote: As pragmatic about other things as you are, I am surprised you don't agree too- think of it as Trump's version of "dogs are not humans so I should not care what happens to them"....

The world is not a safe place for Americans because we have been determined to make it safe for people of other countries. Trump is suggesting that we should act in our own interests in all things and I agree with him on that. It is also the position of the Libertarian Party, although Gary Johnson would not paint it the same way Trump does, the policy implications are the same. We do not interfere in other countries' affairs.

If you agree that we should be decapitating the leadership of other countries when we deem them to be "oppressive" then yes, Hillary is your gal.

Trump is not sane. You are talking about putting someone who has serious emotional stability and maturity problems into that position. I just can't believe you really want to do that.

No, I am not. I am saying that on this subject, Trump is absolutely correct (and so are Gary Johnson and Jill Stein).

Hillary is the outlier on this issue, and her position is the recipe for at least 4 more years of military adventurism that serves no purpose other than to erode America's stature in the world, and create power vacuums that can only be filled by enemies of civilization.

CID1990 wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:
Trump is not sane. You are talking about putting someone who has serious emotional stability and maturity problems into that position. I just can't believe you really want to do that.

No, I am not. I am saying that on this subject, Trump is absolutely correct (and so are Gary Johnson and Jill Stein).

Hillary is the outlier on this issue, and her position is the recipe for at least 4 more years of military adventurism that serves no purpose other than to erode America's stature in the world, and create power vacuums that can only be filled by enemies of civilization.

Read this headline and let it soak in, JSO...

You're basing your judgment on emotion rather than reality which is odd for a supposed conservative/libertarian.

Donald Trump Praises Dictators, But Hillary Clinton Befriends Them

Alex Emmons
July 14 2016, 1:21 p.m.
WHILE HILLARY CLINTON runs ads criticizing Donald Trump for praising dictators, Clinton herself has a history of alliances with strongmen in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Honduras.

Jake Sullivan, Clinton’s top foreign policy adviser, warned last week that Trump’s “praise for brutal strongmen knows no bounds.” The Clinton campaign released a video compilation of Trump’s comments about North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, Russian President Vladamir Putin, and former Iraqi and Libyan dictators Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi.

At a California rally, Clinton accused Trump of trying to become a dictator himself. “We’re trying to elect a president,” said Clinton, “not a dictator.”

Practically speaking, however, the choice voters will face in November will be between a candidate who praises dictators and a candidate who befriends them.

https://theintercept.com/2016/07/14/don ... ends-them/

BDKJMU wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:
Yes but I thought you'd seen them before. Here's the audio of him saying "I guess so" to Howard Stern asking him if he supported invading Iraq. This was prior to the invasion:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir-bExYRnkE[/youtube]

You just have to listen to the first minute.

Now the Lybia thing:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuvZQMY9WNw[/youtube]

He's a lying sack of ****. You need to come to grips with that. If you want to support him even though he is a lying sack of ****, fine. But do so knowing that he is a lying sack of ****.

She's a lying sack of ****. You need to come to grips with that. If you want to support her even though she is a lying sack of ****, fine. But do so knowing that she is a lying sack of ***..

See how easy that is..

But but Trump tells more lies than Hillary..but but Politifact..

I agree with you, but might I suggest adding the word "pathological" before liar?