The 'pardon' was facetious with the caveat that he seems to be Trump's new best friend.

---

I have a personality disorder, I don't drink coffee...

I think the point was simply that 6 years ago, Trump was calling for Assange's head. Now that he's benefiting from wikileaks, he seems to be fine with it. You know, just like during the Bush years, Democrats thought Assange was a hero, and now they think he's an enemy to all that's good and decent.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I understands that but I haven't seen anything that Trump said that praises Assange. He only cited Wikileaks and how easy it was for them to hack the dem emails.

I'm not saying Trump is pure here, I'm just reading a news story that implies that Trump is being hypocritical without providing any real meat.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

So you lied. Ok.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

That's a bit strong. We're talking Trump and Assange here, nothing is to be believed.

---

I have a personality disorder, I don't drink coffee...

You said Trump was going to pardon Assange and linked to a "news" story where nothing of the sort was said.

So you lied.

But lying is ok because Trump!

I suppose it's ok to kidnap and torture disabled people because, you know, fuck Trump.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Accusing me of lying is a stretch, even for you. Maybe you need to develop a more well rounded sense of the absurd so you can discern the difference between lying and facetious distortion.

In the video clip Trump seemed to be of the opinion that Assange should be given the death penalty for his WikiLeaks postings.

Trump now seems to be of the opinion that publishing private and confidential documents is 'a good thing' [as long as he benefits from it].

Because you obviously 'didn't 'get the joke', I will spell it out for you. I equated Trump's apparent change of tune regarding Assange as a 'presidential elect pardon' because, as is his SOP, Trump is pandering to those who support him. Also, if you had thought about it for even a nano second you would have realized it was a joke because president elects do not have the power to pardon anyone.

Finally, I erroneously thought even you couldn't write something as offensive as your "I suppose it's ok..." comment. Congratulations.

---

I have a personality disorder, I don't drink coffee...

Seemed to be = conjecture.


Seems to be...again....


Given your statements here it isn't a stretch to think that you might seem to be ok with....

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Seems should have been your first clue that it was, indeed, conjecture.

I think I have made it more than clear that I find all violent human behavior deplorable. In case you didn't notice, I refrained from making any comments in the other thread. This is not because I condone such behavior but because I was truly shocked, and disturbed, by the reports.

For the record: What those four people did is not only wrong, it is so aberrant it defies description.

---

I have a personality disorder, I don't drink coffee...

Oh that's right.

You see no difference between raping a girl and using violence to stop someone from raping a girl.

Both are equal in your mind.

I forgot that you don't subscribe to reality.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Again, for the record, in another thread I made the statement "killing is killing". I also stated, in essence, that a society may justify the killing of a terrorist and condemn the killing of school children, and that that is a society's prerogative. My point was that killing a terrorist and a group of school children is, unfortunately, the same when it comes to the cessation of life in that life has been extinguished. Somehow some people in the LR don't seem to be able to wrap their minds around such a complex concept.

The REALITY of the situation you outlined above is that it is violent human behavior. 'Our' society has decided that raping a girl is to be condemned and using violence to stop a rape is commendable. Since I am a member of 'our' society I obviously do not disagree with its 'beliefs'. I am, however, well read and intelligent enough to know that 'our society's beliefs' are not applicable everywhere on earth.

---

I have a personality disorder, I don't drink coffee...

Theres only a handful of people here who grasp nuance. Luckily, they span the spectrum of ideologies.

---

who's smarter than you're? i'm!

Theres only a handful of people here who grasp nuance.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

The poster you're referring to just made a blanket statement about all human violence being deplorable, which I seriously doubt he actually believes, and in any event is an expression antithetical to nuanced thinking. Maybe he finds all violence regrettable and in some cases deplores violence, while in other cases deplores the necessity for violence, and that would reflect a degree of nuance. (Or maybe he actually deplores all human violence universally, and that reflects no nuance whatsoever.) Likewise, his profound observation that killing a terrorist and killing a bus full of innocent children both end human life is the furthest thing from nuanced- on the contrary, it's reductive in the extreme.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Why do you say he is fine with it?

Are you saying that Trump should not say anything about the wikileaks publishing of hacked DNC materials? Nor anything about allegations made by Assange?

Obama is the one who has made an issue of the alleged Russian hack. Is Trump not allowed to comment on the ease hacking as reported by Assange?

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

Are you saying that Trump should not say anything about the wikileaks publishing of hacked DNC materials?

No, I'm saying there's been a clear and obvious shift in Trump's treatment of Assange from calling for his execution in 2010. I don't think that's really arguable.

He's perfectly free to comment on the content of the leaks, or Assange's statements, of course.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

According to CNN....

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

And I assume that by leadership of the Democrat party, you mean the single individual (Clinton campaign communications director) who sent the email, right? And even then, the email may not paint a full picture of how she feels about Catholics.

I don't see how that's relevant. JPO was talking about a not uncommon belief of a number of evangelicals. Whether that belief is well founded or ignorant is beside the point.