VP Vance Scolds EU Security Commission Members

1. 84

   GA Andersonposted 5 months ago

   VP Vance scolded the EU: The danger is from within, not from Russia or China.
   
   Google Search Page
   
   It sounded 'spot on' to me.
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 76

      tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      As always, a matter of opinion even Vance's.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

         Yep. Also, "as always," stating the obvious is seldom worth the effort. ;-o
         
         Whether one agrees with the change, or not, the Trump administration is making it clear there is a change in American priorities.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 76

            tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Ha-ha I like your humor. At least someone has it. :-0

            replyreport
   2. 72

      Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      He is capable of articulating and pivoting pretty well... we will see how he stands up to the pressure.
      
      However you have to admit, its worlds better than:
      
      'Ukraine Is a Country in Europe. It Exists Next to Another Country Called Russia' https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-y … 00994.html

      replyreport
   3. 74

      abwilliamsposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      I had not watched it in full to comment on it, until this morning.
      
      I think he spoke with such urgency in order to wake the masses up. Sometimes a good slap and a "snap out of it" are required. I pray, they heed!

      replyreport
      1. 84

         GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

         I don't think his message was intended for the masses of either continent. I think it was for the European leaders: It is no longer 'business as usual.'
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            What do his comments on  free speech, "ignoring voter concerns", migration, social media  and retreating from "fundamental values".
            Have to do with "business as usual?" Particularly in relation to the US?

            replyreport
         2. 72

            Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            The business is bankrupt...
            
            The last chance at salvation it has is the smartest man in the world and a handful of very patriotic people putting themselves at great risk who are trying to save it.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

               Who is the smartest man in the world?

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  No, he is just the richest, but as one can see with Trump, wealth does not always correlate with smarts…..

                  replyreport
         3. 74

            abwilliamsposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Well the neck must turn the head. It's a wake up call, no doubt!

            replyreport
2. 72

   Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago

   You might find this interesting:
   
   Elon Gives Huge DOGE Updates to World Governments
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4LOoxK4j4A

   replyreport
3. 60

   Willowarborposted 5 months ago

   Why the scolding though? Why did Vance proceed to give them a talkin' to?  Only thing missing was the finger wagging. 
   
   I was under the assumption that the meeting was to discuss the administration's plan for negotiating peace in Ukraine. 
   
   Lol, what they got was a lecture about immigration and censorship... Wasn't cool with me.

   replyreport
4. 69

   IslandBitesposted 5 months ago

   SMH

   replyreport
5. 82

   Sharlee01posted 5 months ago

   Took the time to listen. Thanks for posting it.
   
   Just my view and I could write a book. But I will keep it short.
   
   I think Vice President JD Vance's speech at the Munich Security Conference was refreshingly honest and unafraid to confront the difficult truths many are unwilling to hear. His points about the internal threats to democratic values, particularly the erosion of free speech, were spot-on. It's rare to see a leader openly acknowledge these issues, especially in a forum like this where there is often pressure to maintain diplomatic niceties.
   
   I also appreciated how Vance contrasted the Trump administration’s approach with the current Biden administration's policies. He made it clear that under Trump, the U.S. would prioritize a more direct and unyielding stance on global issues, something that I think resonates with a lot of people who feel the current administration has not been as forceful. His remarks were bold, and it's clear he believes in doing what's necessary to protect both America’s interests and broader global stability.
   
   However, it was clear by the lack of applause and the audience's stoic faces that they were not happy with his speech. It seemed as though the blunt truths he was speaking were not well received by the international crowd, which shows just how uncomfortable and unwilling some are to accept the reality he laid out. Despite that, I think he did exactly what needed to be done—saying what others are too afraid to speak. And he said it with eloquence and strength of conviction.
   
   I noted he was comfortable with what he was sharing. I like anyone who is comfortable with sharing their views without fear. It’s refreshing to see a leader stand firm in their beliefs, regardless of the pushback. Bravo!

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      That isn't what they were there for though? He just hijacked the thing to go on a rant.  To lecture and maybe try to shame our allies?  The guy, in my opinion, continually shows that he is out of his depth

      replyreport
      1. 82

         Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

         It’s clear we took very different things away from his speech. I don’t usually debate opinions on speeches—I’m confident in my own perspective, and I see no reason to make anyone uncomfortable about theirs.

         replyreport
         1. 83

            Readmikenowposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Shar,
            
            Trust me when I say Europe is a mess. They Will jail a person for alleged Hate Speech for disagreeing with the government. In the UK a woman was arrested for silently praying outside an abortion clinic. Not making a sound. In other European countries people have done jail time for uttering a gay slur..to someone who wasn't even gay...but it was overheard by a gay person. Jail Time for a comment. The list goes on. Europeans need to hear this.

            replyreport
            1. 82

               Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

               "Trust me when I say Europe is a mess."
               
               From the perspective of any American rightwing person, it could be considered nothing else.
               
               It confirms for me that America is on its decline...

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  America was in decline due to the Democrats’ grand experiment—placing a confused man in the White House, surrounded by who-knows-who, making ridiculous decisions. That’s my take. I’m very pleased with what I’m seeing. I was more or less promised that the system would be torn down to the studs and fixed. It’s being torn down now, and I’ll hold off on judgment until I see the results. But I’ll say this—I’m happy to be on the side that declared it all stops now. I’ve waited for this moment for nearly 20 years, and I feel joy and elation at this new administration.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                     "placing a confused man in the White House..."
                     
                     Confusion, dementia or just dumb?  I think a little of each...
                     
                     https://x.com/ArtCandee/status/1890770961999278122
                     
                     Oh my, dear leader....
                     B. R. I. C. S...
                     
                     CHINA IS THE  "C"
                     
                     "I was more or less promised that the system would be torn down to the studs and fixed. "
                     
                     The plan to "fix"  is nowhere to be seen.   In my opinion, the goal is simply to run through the china shop, smashing everything they can.  It's all in an effort to justify the coming tax giveaways to the wealthy.   There's no concern for the struggles of the everyday American.

                     replyreport
                     1. 82

                        Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                        Yes, Trump essentially promised, in his own way, to tear it all down. I’m not sure why anyone is shocked that he's following through on it. As a true supporter of MAGA, our views are quite different. You’re absolutely entitled to your perspective, but understand that your views feel so foreign to me, it's like you're speaking another language.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                           How does one not understand that China is a member of BRICS?

                           replyreport
                        2. 60

                           Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                           Again,  what happens in the aftermath of it all being torn down? The consequences? Where is the plan to rebuild? Seems like we are to be left standing in the rubble.    Does maga know how to build anything?

                           replyreport
                           1. 82

                              Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                              Come on, this is laughable he has not been in office for a month. Your concerns are premature. Actually, as he dismantles, he is also building, fixing, and strengthening federal agencies. When it comes to wars, he is actively working towards peaceful solutions. He has been honest with world leaders, and all of this seems very positive to me.

                              replyreport
                  2. 82

                     Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                     Regardless of what you may think of me, I find this man to be impudent, rash, oblivious, irresponsible, callous and many other adjectives that would fill this page. He and his attitudes are exceedingly dangerous and while you and yours continue to prop him up, Trump will come up against a hard and fast boundary that if he crosses it, this nation will no longer be a democratic republic.
                     
                     A blind man with a chainsaw is not the way to fix things and I don’t want it all torn down to be replaced with just another ideological set of values that the other half of this country will resist.
                     
                     I am seeing the results already, the irresponsible cutting and slashing with no regard for the consequences and the subtle nuances that have to be considered beforehand?
                     
                     I cannot and will not give such a man, as Trump, an inch as he has proven to be an impediment to progress since coming down the escalator 10 years ago. So, you are free to revel at his election, but that joy is not shared and will be point of continued resistance for the rest of us, that means USA in continued strife and contention.
                     
                     So, When he “crosses the line” as defined as a Constitutional Crisis” we will be there with truncheons waiting for him.

                     replyreport
                     1. 82

                        Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                        I noted your reply. I have come to know your thoughts on Trump well. Seems like you may be beating a dead horse to continue to repeat it.
                        
                        " So, you are free to revel at his election, but that joy is not shared and will be point of continued resistance for the rest of us, that means USA in continued strife and contention." Cred
                        
                        You appear to feel you can speak for a group.  I feel I can only speak for myself. I can get in enough trouble doing that, let alone pull in others.
                        
                        "Regardless of what you may think of me, "Cred
                        
                        I see nothing in my comment that would indicate my personal feelings regarding you.  I feel all have a right to share views. I try to stay within the boundaries of a conversation.

                        replyreport
                        1. 82

                           Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                           For many, if I repeat major themes often and frequently, it just might get through to others when once is not enough.
                           
                           I speak for myself and a large swath of the population expressing the same concerns that I do that did not support Trump for those reasons

                           replyreport
                           1. 82

                              Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                              Okay

                              replyreport
                           2. 82

                              Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                              "For many, if I repeat major themes often and frequently, it just might get through to others when once is not enough."Cred
                              
                              Must agree with that. I see it prevalent in our society today, I mean it is the way media have gleaned faithful followers.

                              replyreport
            2. 60

               Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

               Even if the claims  in your post  were credible instead of misleading, what business is it of ours?   Vance was there to contribute to a conversation about peace in Ukraine, not to lecture our allies.  He was an embarrassment.  You could hear putin, orban and others clapping though.

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  "Even if the  in your post  were credible instead of misleading, what business is it of ours?   Vance was there to contribute to a conversation about peace in Ukraine, not to lecture our allies.  He was an embarrassment.  You could hear putin, orban and others clapping though." Willow
                  
                  First --- During the 61st Munich Security Conference in February 2025, Vice President JD Vance engaged in several high-profile meetings. He held discussions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, focusing on the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and exploring potential avenues for peace.
                  
                  Your claim that Vice President J.D. Vance was merely there to "contribute to a conversation about peace in Ukraine, not to lecture our allies" is misleading. Vance was not some passive attendee but an invited speaker who had clearly prepared remarks. The idea that he should have only engaged in discussion without presenting a viewpoint that challenges the mainstream NATO stance ignores the entire purpose of diplomatic dialogue. If every leader at these events simply echoed the same talking points, there would be no real debate or progress toward resolution.
                  
                  Calling Vance "an embarrassment" is nothing more than an opinion with no factual basis. As Vice President of the United States, he holds a legitimate viewpoint on the war in Ukraine—one that resonates with a significant portion of the American public. Whether one agrees or disagrees with his position, dismissing him as an embarrassment is just a way to avoid engaging with the substance of his argument. If advocating for an end to endless U.S. funding for Ukraine while pushing for negotiations is embarrassing, then that same critique should be applied to many world leaders and experts who have voiced similar concerns.
                  
                  The claim that "you could hear Putin, Orbán, and others clapping" is a classic guilt-by-association fallacy. Just because certain figures might agree with some of what Vance said does not make his argument invalid. If this logic were applied consistently, then anyone advocating for peace negotiations—whether on the right or left—would also be discredited simply because an adversary happened to support a similar stance. Foreign policy decisions should be debated on their merits, not dismissed based on who agrees with them.
                  
                  Ultimately, the attempt to smear Vance as an embarrassment or to frame his position as some kind of appeasement to adversaries lacks intellectual honesty. The reality is that he was invited, he was prepared, and he presented a viewpoint that reflects the concerns of many Americans who question the effectiveness of current Ukraine policies. His presence at the event was not a random occurrence—it was a deliberate engagement in an important global issue. Dismissing his argument with emotional attacks instead of addressing its substance does nothing to advance the discussion.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                     I will put it very simply, I don't care what Vance thinks of the leadership of European nations or the actions they take or don't take... he wasn't there to give a lecture.  And actually I thought it was a core belief of maga to keep our nose out of the business of other countries LOL?   
                     
                     "Americans who question the effectiveness of current Ukraine policies. His presence at the event was not a random occurrence—it was a deliberate engagement in an important global issue. "
                     
                     And he totally sidestepped that issue in favor of railing about censorship, free speech , cultural and immigration policies of our European allies.   He was completely out of line.

                     replyreport
                     1. 82

                        Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                        I believe JD Vance is an exceptionally strong and eloquent speaker, unafraid to express his thoughts and stand by his convictions.
                        
                        Again, he was invited to speak. This forum featured many speakers, so why assume otherwise? In my view, he spoke as the Vice President of the United States, representing the views and agenda of our current president the leader of the free world. I was more than impressed with his strong speech and the message he delivered. I fully expected some wouldn’t like it, but for me, he hit them hard with exactly what I believe. I loved it. His words echoed a clear message—"America is back and intends to lead with strength and common sense. Can't share any more than this. I have no reason to debate differing views.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                           What is the focus of the Munich Security Conference? 
                           
                           "The Munich Security Conference is the world's leading forum for debating international security policy. It is a venue for diplomatic initiatives to address the world's most pressing security concerns.".
                           
                           Not a forum to attack your allies, while ignoring  Ukraine and the defence agenda. 
                           
                           This year's Conference was supposed to be primarily about two things: how to end the war in Ukraine without giving in to Russia, and how Europe needed to boost its spending on defence.
                           
                           But Vance, used his time at the podium to talk about neither.... Like I said, in favor of a lecture.

                           replyreport
                           1. 82

                              Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                              The MSC is indeed one of the world’s leading forums for international security policy, where major diplomatic figures meet to debate and discuss pressing global issues. It serves as a venue for tackling everything from nuclear threats to international alliances, and any participant invited to speak there is expected to contribute thoughtfully to these critical conversations. JD Vance’s speech at the 61st Munich Security Conference was an important part of that dialogue, as he addressed several key issues in international security, U.S. foreign policy, and European democracy. He did not attack allies, he offered straight talk without looking like a run-of-the-mill politician. We have a new administration that promotes this form of straight talk. This is a fact.
                              
                              One of Vance’s main points was his call for a shift in U.S. and European policies towards Ukraine. He emphasized the importance of diplomacy and suggested that the current trajectory, with continued U.S. support for Ukraine’s war efforts, may not lead to a viable long-term solution. He argued that “America is back” and intends to lead from a position of strength, but this strength, according to Vance, should not solely focus on military support for Ukraine. Instead, he called for a balanced approach that includes peace talks, a solution to the war, and more responsibility from European allies.
                              
                              Vance also addressed the issues of European security, particularly the implications of mass migration and the protection of democratic values. He noted, “Europe needs to take a hard look at its own policies and not just rely on the United States to handle every crisis.” This sentiment directly engages with the broader discussion at the Munich Security Conference about NATO’s role and how Europe needs to contribute more to its own security.
                              
                              Furthermore, Vance’s speech raised concerns about the fragility of democratic institutions, particularly in Europe, as he highlighted how certain European governments are increasingly curbing freedom of speech and empowering extremist groups. He stated, “The defense of democracy starts at home. The United States must not ignore Europe’s own challenges with free speech and the rise of nationalism.” His remarks resonated with broader concerns raised by others at the conference, such as Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz and other European leaders who stressed the importance of maintaining the rule of law and human rights in the face of growing populism.
                              
                              In conclusion, Vance’s address at the Munich Security Conference was directly aligned with the key themes of the event. It wasn’t just a one-sided lecture, but rather a legitimate contribution to an ongoing debate on international security, European unity, and U.S. leadership in global affairs. His comments about the war in Ukraine, European security challenges, and democracy reflected not only his personal views but also concerns shared by many who question the status quo of international policies.
                              
                              This is how I interpreted it—we clearly listen with different perspectives. I was proud of his speech, but it's obvious we walked away with very different opinions.

                              replyreport
                        2. 60

                           Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                           Why should the average American struggling with grocery costs care about the immigration, speech policies of European nations??

                           replyreport
                           1. 82

                              Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                              "Why should the average American struggling with grocery costs care about the immigration, speech policies of European nations??" Willow
                              
                              I can't answer that. Only can speak about my views.  I have already shared my thoughts on immigration. GA brought up JD's speech, and I have well shared my thoughts on Vance's speech. My concerns are with immigration and somewhat foreign policy.

                              replyreport
6. 74

   abwilliamsposted 5 months ago

   Cred, per usual, you have an explosive story playing out in your mind, which just isn't so. It's not healthy, and that's the real danger --- not Trump!

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

      AB, yes, it is explosive and I recommend keeping a safe distance outside of the blast radius.
      
      I have to be earnest in informing others what it is that I see coming and it is playing out already. Call it a compulsion or obsession.

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

         What is coming is due to our government growing too large and unresponsive to the people.  DC has become a Den of Snobbish Thieves.
         
         If the combination of Musk, Gabbard, Kennedy, etc. cannot go in there and restore the government to be something much closer to a responsive government that is transparent in its spending and accountable for the massive waste and fraud that currently has a strangle-hold... the Country... the World is doomed to dark days ahead.
         
         "Your side" had their chance... they added over 10 Trillion dollars to the debt.  They gave trillions to BlackRock, Vanguard and others... which is the primary cause of the 25% inflation we suffered, a massive transfer of wealth from the people... to the elites.
         
         "Your side" gave us war in Ukraine, and elsewhere.
         
         "Your side" gave us a flood of fentanyl and migrants.
         
         You need to sit back and hope the smartest man in the world and some of the most patriotic Americans willing to put up with endless character assassination efforts can do the impossible and restore American politics and American government spending back to sanity.
         
         "your side" had no answers to the problems... they only added to them.

         replyreport
         1. 82

            Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

            So with Trump and company we replace one variety of thief with other?
            
            Like I have said to you before, our world views are quite different.
            
            I don’t buy any of your narratives about the causes of the wars and drugs coming in.
            
            I wont sit back, because that is akin to surrender. I am determined to see Trump and company discredited and ceremoniously or unceremonious removed.
            
            While my side did not have the answers, your side will only exacerbate the problems we already have. I see that in less than the 30 days of Trump reign.

            replyreport
            1. 72

               Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

               Your side did not have the answers?
               
               Is that what stealing several trillion dollars is called?
               
               The DOGE is exposing, every day, the corruption...
               
               They are showing where the bread crumbs lead...
               
               I are you afraid that when this all proves out... that the system will collapse?
               
               Look they just drained out several trillion dollars, giving it to all their friends and supporters... so they, all those DC elite Democrats (mostly) will be just fine... Bernie Sanders has his hundred million... Obama his hundreds of millions... they're good... they sold you out a long time ago.
               
               So, if your Social Security check stops showing up... you have them to blame... you have them to thank for spending more in 4 years than was previously spent in the 240 years before that...

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  "The DOGE is exposing, every day, the corruption..."
                  
                  "Trump said he would provide details Thursday of what he and Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) claim are billions of dollars of wasteful and fraudulent government spending.
                  
                  "I'm going to read to you some of the names that hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars have been given to," the president said in a news conference Wednesday.
                  
                  But the president had not produced his list as of Thursday evening."
                  
                  Anybody catch the list???  Or is this just more misleading BS?  A lie?  Like the other claims they've made?

                  replyreport
               2. 82

                  Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  "So, if your Social Security check stops showing up... you have them to blame... you have them to thank for spending more in 4 years than was previously spent in the 240 years before that..".
                  
                  No, I have Trump and the Republicans to blame and you can bet that I will blame them. They have been against the concept of Social Security since its inception.

                  replyreport
7. 76

   tsmogposted 5 months ago

   Forget all the pundits and commentators. See and read Vance's speech transcript and put to use your very own critical thinking skills and decide if it resonates with your values.
   
   FULL TRANSCRIPT: VP JD Vance Remarks at the Munich Security Conference presented by The Singju (Oct 15, 2025)
   https://singjupost.com/full-transcript- … nglepage=1
   
   Note: There is an option to listen to the speech. Maybe you want to watch/listen to the White House released YouTube video. Body language at times offers a context of its own.
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCOsgfINdKg
   
   A feature of the transcript posted is it is laid out in an easy to use outline format with subheadings.
   
   ** Introduction and Acknowledgments
   ** Security Concerns and European Values
   ** Lessons from the Cold War
   ** Concerns About Religious Freedom in the UK
   ** Censorship in the United States
   ** Election Cancellation in Romania
   ** Defense Spending and European Security
   ** The Importance of Democratic Mandates
   ** The Challenge of Mass Migration
   ** The Importance of Listening to the People
   
   Note: Yup, this comes late in the discussion while someone may have already posted the information offering an opportunity to learn. My excuse is I just now  have free time to give  it attention. Such is life . . .

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

      Great suggestion. I was pleased to see this thread posted. It made people listen to the speech before offering a view.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

         Yup, I read it, pondered it based on it being factual, and then did a 'Fact Check'. Uh-Oh! No need to go into the specifics.

         replyreport
         1. 84

            GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Specifically, what specifics are you avoiding specifying?
            
            Were they in the 'lawbreaker'  examples the VP offered? Or the Romanian election claim? Or the mass immigration numbers?
            
            Although there is 'more to the story' for most of the examples (ie. the 'man praying' or Russian interference), those details don't change the objective point of the examples.
            
            What bothered you, specifically?  ;-)
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 76

               tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

               "Specifically, what specifics are you avoiding specifying?
               
               If you desire to call it avoidance, then so be it.

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  To be bold, as always--- why did you join into the thread when you were not up on joining in?  Yes, your first comment offered info that was well put--- but----

                  replyreport
               2. 84

                  GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  Would 'reluctant' be a better word?
                  
                  GA

                  replyreport
                  1. 76

                     tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                     I guess so.
                     
                     [Edit: Were there falsehoods? Yes or No?]
                     
                     Were there any fallacies? Yes or No?
                     
                     Were there half-truths? Yes or No?
                     
                     Were there truths? Yes or No?
                     
                     The one opinion I will offer is he has no leg to stand on by lecturing them on democracy while we can't even agree upon what that is here in this country. I doubt you will find agreement within just this forum.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Willowarborposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                        Yep, his lecture was out of place.

                        replyreport
                     2. 84

                        GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                        I'm not sure what "half-truths" came to your mind, so I don't know if there were any, or not.
                        
                        Also as an opinion, there were half-truths—in the sense there was more to the stories of the examples, but there were also truths in them, such as the dangers of deeming public voices to be invalid when one doesn't agree with them.
                        
                        You see, that wasn't so hard.
                        
                        GA

                        replyreport
                        1. 76

                           tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                           Okay . . .

                           replyreport
                        2. 72

                           Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                           What I need is a Suspicious Mind...
                           
                           We're caught in a trap, we can't walk out...
                           
                           Do I still see suspicion in your mind...
                           
                           We can't build our dreams, on suspicious minds...
                           
                           Anywho...
                           
                           I get this suspicion when I think about the Pandemic... and the trillions that got doled out to 'save the system' to BlackRock and Vanguard and others... money I have a sneaky suspicion (there I go again) will remain with those financial institutions indefinitely...
                           
                           And then they push all this "woke"... BlackRock especially pushes its EGS and DEI initiatives down into every corporation it is a majority shareholder in... Disney pushing every gender but CIS for years now...
                           
                           Did they think it would actually work... or were these highly intelligent people pushing things along to get such an outcome?
                           
                           You have to consider how intelligent, devious, capable of intricately planning things out you have to be... to fund a USAID program that in turn funds a 'non-profit' that in turn provides 'free' cell phones and pagers to 'terrorists' in foreign lands that then gets used to blow those 'terrorists' up.
                           
                           How far are you willing to go to maintain control?
                           
                           How intricately devious will the deception become?

                           replyreport
                           1. 84

                              GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                              I'm at a loss for words.
                              
                              GA  ;-)

                              replyreport
                           2. 82

                              Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                              "How far are you willing to go to maintain control?"
                              
                              It appears that you willing to destroy democracy itself and cave to tyranny and despotism to maintain control. It's that what Righty has always been about?

                              replyreport
         2. 82

            Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Pleased you took the time... I mean how else can one come to an opinion?

            replyreport
            1. 76

               tsmogposted 5 months agoin reply to this

               Thank you. Yes, I did take the time, however haven't come to a resolute opinion overall or specifically using the outline format I suggested. As a matter of fact with 'myself' having friends in Europe that I communicate with weekly to monthly while one is a Dearest Best Friend in Sweden I find I have a bias.

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  I see.

                  replyreport