United States Corrupt Twattery

[Gwadien]

"No free trade without free speech", apparently:

UK business secretary denies free speech issue featured in US tariff talks

Source reportedly says ‘no free trade without free speech’ after US bureau holds meeting with anti-abortion campaigner

www.theguardian.com

No free trade without us scoring abortion points apparently

 

[Scouse]

What's an abortion point?

 

[Gwadien]

What's an abortion point?

She was campaigning for anti abortion shit, post where MAGA peeps are supporting freedom of speech cases that don't align with their views.

Isn't that the number one principle of freedom of speech? - 'I may not agree with you but I'll die for your right to say it' paraphrase of course.

 

[Scouse]

MAGA peeps

I think this explains your current mode of thinking, unfortunately. Give it a couple of minutes, I've cut 13 mins out...


View: https://youtu.be/flzD-bATkzc?t=786


Makes me sad.

 

[Gwadien]

I think this explains your current mode of thinking, unfortunately. Give it a couple of minutes, I've cut 13 mins out...


View: https://youtu.be/flzD-bATkzc?t=786


Makes me sad.

Makes me sad you always have a pop at people for being unable to answer the question yet that's precisely what you're doing here.

Plus when I was talking about MAGA peeps, I was referring to those in Trump's cabinet, IE people that don't give a flying fuck about freedom of speech and care way less than any lefty-woke European Government, but will use it to suit their own agenda, by forcing it to be an issue which is what is precisely going on here.

 

[Scouse]

Makes me sad you always have a pop at people for being unable to answer the question yet that's precisely what you're doing here.

Plus when I was talking about MAGA peeps, I was referring to those in Trump's cabinet, IE people that don't give a flying fuck about freedom of speech and care way less than any lefty-woke European Government, but will use it to suit their own agenda, by forcing it to be an issue which is what is precisely going on here.

I was waiting to see if you bothered getting the point because it was relevant to the original post. It sort of "answered" it in a roundabout way. So maybe I'll come back to that...

Isn't that the number one principle of freedom of speech? - 'I may not agree with you but I'll die for your right to say it' paraphrase of course.

I don't see you dying for the right of an old medical scientist to stand there in silent protest with a sign saying "come talk to me, only if you want to"...

Apparently, because she holds anti-abortion views you're happy with her comeuppance?

On not answering your question - I kind of did. You originally narrowed down my point to a single issue - abortion. You've never substantively addressed the whole thrust of the issue, and you're whatabouting the "MAGA lot". Even if the politicians are disingenuous, the American public voted them in and aren't all barbarians, like those who align themselves with a "leftist agenda" like to think. Identity politics. That's what the video was about. That sort of shit, and the fact that I still have this in mind:

Oh, and I've finally worked it out - it really shouldn't have taken me this long.

You change your politics to oppose the government of the day, don't you?

I can see through this and other posts that you want to find a box to put me in, so you can say "scouse thinks this and by association he believes all these other things (that are wrong) as well". The pigeon-holing action - boxing me (and the "MAGA folks") in is a false association fallacy.

It's comforting to put people in boxes. It means you don't have to do the heavy intellectual lifting and deal with individuals. Which is frustrating on a discussion forum, because if you're going to interact on this forum then only the individual really matters...