The Second Term of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States of America

[Rigby5]

The diagnosis standards have changed. j




This focuses on the most recent changes but is worth reading

https://www.autismeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Diagnostic-criteria-for-autism-under-the-DSM-5.pdf

Fact is, because of the changes in diagnostic standards there are people who would now be classified as autistic who would not have been in the past.

I totally disagree, because the vast increase in dysfunctional symptoms simply did not exist in the past.
In the past, almost no one was unable to learn, communicate, etc.
Nor were there so many cases of road rage, school shootings, senseless wars, etc.
It seems almost the whole world is totally mentally unbalanced.
We never would have allowed constraints on immigration over 100 years ago, and we used to be proud of being a "melting pot".
No one 100 years ago would have allowed ICE to violate the Bill of Rights.

The only things that makes me unsure of the degradation of society having a generic cause, is that we did used to be even more overtly racist as a whole?
So there is a possibility I am just remembering a more whitewashed version of history?

 

[Shiftless2]

Denmark's PM just vowed to defend "every inch" of NATO territory. Not from Russia. From Donald Trump.
That sentence should be impossible. Here's how we got there.
Thirty-two NATO leaders gathered in Ankara this week for a summit meant to show a united front against Vladimir Putin. Trump got off the plane and picked a fight with an ally instead.

Greenland "should be controlled by the United States, not by Denmark," he declared. He claimed America needs the island for "protection of the world." He sneered that it "doesn't help Denmark."

He told reporters he was "not happy with NATO" for pushing back, warned Europe to "be careful," and floated yanking every American soldier off the continent.

Mette Frederiksen didn't blink. Greenland is "of course not for sale," she said. Denmark is a sovereign state, and every ally needs to respect its borders and the Greenlanders' right to decide their own future.

Now the part Trump doesn’t want you to know about.

America already has a military base on Greenland. We've had one since a 1951 defense treaty Denmark signed willingly, and we pay no rent, because Denmark is our friend. Greenland already sits inside NATO. Every security benefit Trump claims to be chasing, the United States has enjoyed for 75 years.

His claim that Greenland is "surrounded" by Chinese and Russian ships? The former president of Iceland, who chairs the Arctic Circle forum, says those ships don't exist.

So the allies stopped humoring him. Iceland's Prime Minister said Greenland "belongs to the people of Greenland." Finland's president told Trump to "be more cool" and pointed out that seven NATO members are Arctic nations who can handle the Arctic just fine.

And here is the part that should make every American's face burn.

Article 5, NATO's sacred promise that an attack on one is an attack on all, has been invoked exactly once in the alliance's 77-year history. September 11, 2001. For us.

Denmark answered that call and sent its soldiers to Afghanistan. Forty-three of them came home in coffins, one of the highest sacrifices per capita of any country in that war.

That is the ally Trump flew to Turkey to threaten.

Putin could not have scripted this summit better himself. The alliance built to stop him spent the week defending itself from the American president.

So when Frederiksen stood before the cameras and called Article 5 "our insurance," she didn't have to say against whom.

Everyone in the room already knew.

SOURCE with comments

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 5638

Denmark's PM just vowed to defend "every inch" of NATO territory. Not from Russia. From Donald Trump.
That sentence should be impossible. Here's how we got there.
Thirty-two NATO leaders gathered in Ankara this week for a summit meant to show a united front against Vladimir Putin. Trump got off the plane and picked a fight with an ally instead.

Greenland "should be controlled by the United States, not by Denmark," he declared. He claimed America needs the island for "protection of the world." He sneered that it "doesn't help Denmark."

He told reporters he was "not happy with NATO" for pushing back, warned Europe to "be careful," and floated yanking every American soldier off the continent.

Mette Frederiksen didn't blink. Greenland is "of course not for sale," she said. Denmark is a sovereign state, and every ally needs to respect its borders and the Greenlanders' right to decide their own future.

Now the part Trump doesn’t want you to know about.

America already has a military base on Greenland. We've had one since a 1951 defense treaty Denmark signed willingly, and we pay no rent, because Denmark is our friend. Greenland already sits inside NATO. Every security benefit Trump claims to be chasing, the United States has enjoyed for 75 years.

His claim that Greenland is "surrounded" by Chinese and Russian ships? The former president of Iceland, who chairs the Arctic Circle forum, says those ships don't exist.

So the allies stopped humoring him. Iceland's Prime Minister said Greenland "belongs to the people of Greenland." Finland's president told Trump to "be more cool" and pointed out that seven NATO members are Arctic nations who can handle the Arctic just fine.

And here is the part that should make every American's face burn.

Article 5, NATO's sacred promise that an attack on one is an attack on all, has been invoked exactly once in the alliance's 77-year history. September 11, 2001. For us.

Denmark answered that call and sent its soldiers to Afghanistan. Forty-three of them came home in coffins, one of the highest sacrifices per capita of any country in that war.

That is the ally Trump flew to Turkey to threaten.

Putin could not have scripted this summit better himself. The alliance built to stop him spent the week defending itself from the American president.

So when Frederiksen stood before the cameras and called Article 5 "our insurance," she didn't have to say against whom.

Everyone in the room already knew.

SOURCE with comments

Actually I never used to like NATO.
Back around WWI, the countries who are now in NATO, used to be the evil colonial imperialists, like England, France, Spain, and the US.
It is good to see England, France, and Spain have gotten better, but unfortunate the US has gotten worse.

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 5638

Denmark's PM just vowed to defend "every inch" of NATO territory. Not from Russia. From Donald Trump.
That sentence should be impossible. Here's how we got there.
Thirty-two NATO leaders gathered in Ankara this week for a summit meant to show a united front against Vladimir Putin. Trump got off the plane and picked a fight with an ally instead.

Greenland "should be controlled by the United States, not by Denmark," he declared. He claimed America needs the island for "protection of the world." He sneered that it "doesn't help Denmark."

He told reporters he was "not happy with NATO" for pushing back, warned Europe to "be careful," and floated yanking every American soldier off the continent.

Mette Frederiksen didn't blink. Greenland is "of course not for sale," she said. Denmark is a sovereign state, and every ally needs to respect its borders and the Greenlanders' right to decide their own future.

Now the part Trump doesn’t want you to know about.

America already has a military base on Greenland. We've had one since a 1951 defense treaty Denmark signed willingly, and we pay no rent, because Denmark is our friend. Greenland already sits inside NATO. Every security benefit Trump claims to be chasing, the United States has enjoyed for 75 years.

His claim that Greenland is "surrounded" by Chinese and Russian ships? The former president of Iceland, who chairs the Arctic Circle forum, says those ships don't exist.

So the allies stopped humoring him. Iceland's Prime Minister said Greenland "belongs to the people of Greenland." Finland's president told Trump to "be more cool" and pointed out that seven NATO members are Arctic nations who can handle the Arctic just fine.

And here is the part that should make every American's face burn.

Article 5, NATO's sacred promise that an attack on one is an attack on all, has been invoked exactly once in the alliance's 77-year history. September 11, 2001. For us.

Denmark answered that call and sent its soldiers to Afghanistan. Forty-three of them came home in coffins, one of the highest sacrifices per capita of any country in that war.

That is the ally Trump flew to Turkey to threaten.

Putin could not have scripted this summit better himself. The alliance built to stop him spent the week defending itself from the American president.

So when Frederiksen stood before the cameras and called Article 5 "our insurance," she didn't have to say against whom.

Everyone in the room already knew.

SOURCE with comments

Odd that people like Trump who claim global warming is not happening, would want Greenland, which is only valuable if it warms up quite a bit?
I have read that capturing the fresh water melt off could be profitable if shipped to the Mideast?

 

[sear]

"Have you ever heard of any real vaccine that did not prevent infection and instead prevented immunity like mRNA does?" R5 #3,571

No?

"Actually I never used to like NATO.
Back around WWI, the countries who are now in NATO, used to be the evil colonial imperialists, like England, France, Spain, and the US." R5 #3,583

It would be insensible to ignore such history.
But it may be even more insensible to deem that history determinative, despite subsequent generations of more democratic operation.
After all, aren't most or all the scoundrels you refer to dead?

"It is good to see England, France, and Spain have gotten better, but unfortunate the US has gotten worse." R5 #3,383

R5,
My knowledge of history is far too limited to know of previous examples of mutual defense alliances.
I know European history recounts royal weddings, sometimes arranged when the betrothed were children.
The utility of these marriages were in part to reduce the risk of war.
But the form of government defended by these matrimonial alliances were monarchies.

And while NATO may indeed aim to preserve member nation sovereignty, it seems to me there's a broader implication of an international defense of democratic capitalism.
I believe for example it is more than statistical coincidence that NATO and the E.U.* overlay.

"A marriage is no amusement but a solemn act, and generally a sad one." Victoria (1819-1901)

“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” attributed to Winston L. S. Churchill

* Because the historic trend is that good trade partners seldom war against one another, one approach to promote peace is to promote trade.

 

[Rigby5]

No?

It would be insensible to ignore such history.
But it may be even more insensible to deem that history determinative, despite subsequent generations of more democratic operation.
After all, aren't most or all the scoundrels you refer to dead?


R5,
My knowledge of history is far too limited to know of previous examples of mutual defense alliances.
I know European history recounts royal weddings, sometimes arranged when the betrothed were children.
The utility of these marriages were in part to reduce the risk of war.
But the form of government defended by these matrimonial alliances were monarchies.

And while NATO may indeed aim to preserve member nation sovereignty, it seems to me there's a broader implication of an international defense of democratic capitalism.
I believe for example it is more than statistical coincidence that NATO and the E.U.* overlay.

"A marriage is no amusement but a solemn act, and generally a sad one." Victoria (1819-1901)

“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” attributed to Winston L. S. Churchill

* Because the historic trend is that good trade partners seldom war against one another, one approach to promote peace is to promote trade.

My opinion is that NATO has nothing at all to do with "defense" and is actually has to do with shared aggressive conspiracies.
Like:
NATO founders starting WWI and WWII
England and the US taking over Iran in 1953
England and the US taking over Iraq in 2003
NATO took over Bosnia and Serbia.
NATO invaded Libya in 2011
NATO took over the Ukraine in 2014

The reality is that monarchies are actually usually oligarchies, and all capitalist countries actually are still oligarchies.

 

[Shiftless2]

 

[sear]

"My opinion is that NATO has nothing at all to do with "defense" and is actually has to do with shared aggressive conspiracies.
Like:
NATO founders starting WWI and WWII
England and the US taking over Iran in 1953
England and the US taking over Iraq in 2003
NATO took over Bosnia and Serbia.
NATO invaded Libya in 2011
NATO took over the Ukraine in 2014

The reality is that monarchies are actually usually oligarchies, and all capitalist countries actually are still oligarchies." R5 #3,586

Blaming the entirety of NATO for a wrong by one member is the same type error of blaming the human race for Hitler.

"England and the US taking over Iraq in 2003" R5 #3,586

My emphatic position on this is it was the GWB administration that lied the U.S. into that War.
They outright lied about it. Unmistakably so.

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." V.P. Cheney "8/26/02" C-SPAN2

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt, that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
U.S. President Bush (the younger) televised address to the U.S. March 17th, 2003

MARCH 30, 2003: Donald Rumsfeld: We know where the WMD are
We know where [the weapons of mass destruction] are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. [ABC This Week, 3/30/03]

If NATO was swindled into joining the U.S. government fiasco I'd consider it a NATO policy vulnerability rather than an intrinsic megalomaniacal ambition.

In the 1970's I was part of the NATO Cold War contingent in West Germany. My years of experience in that role, in that experience corroborates my impression NATO is primarily defensive.
And not only that, but that NATO's posture is:
if they present a formidable enough defensive capability, they won't have to use it much, if at all.

 

[Shiftless2]

 

[sear]

CBS-TV News reports a portion of the white house has been draped with an image of that portion of the white house.
It seems President Trump has additional white house demolition planned.

When Trump defaced The Kennedy Center by displaying the Trump name on it,
a law court ordered the Trump name removed.

There is no parallel remedy for the demolition of the white house East wing.

 

[Rigby5]

Blaming the entirety of NATO for a wrong by one member is the same type error of blaming the human race for Hitler.


My emphatic position on this is it was the GWB administration that lied the U.S. into that War.
They outright lied about it. Unmistakably so.

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." V.P. Cheney "8/26/02" C-SPAN2

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt, that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
U.S. President Bush (the younger) televised address to the U.S. March 17th, 2003

MARCH 30, 2003: Donald Rumsfeld: We know where the WMD are
We know where [the weapons of mass destruction] are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. [ABC This Week, 3/30/03]

If NATO was swindled into joining the U.S. government fiasco I'd consider it a NATO policy vulnerability rather than an intrinsic megalomaniacal ambition.

In the 1970's I was part of the NATO Cold War contingent in West Germany. My years of experience in that role, in that experience corroborates my impression NATO is primarily defensive.
And not only that, but that NATO's posture is:
if they present a formidable enough defensive capability, they won't have to use it much, if at all.

But the reality is the UN is supposed to play that defensive role, universally.
So not only is NATO not needed, but clearly was belligerent and hostile towards the Warsaw Pact countries, so was not at all defensive really.
Its gotten so bad that the US is actually imposing illegal economic sanctions on countries, and that is totally illegal according to the 1906 Geneva Conventions we signed.

 

[Shiftless2]

Sounds like he forgot his grift







In fairness, I should point out that he was selling residency not citizenship but does anyone think he knows the differenc?

 

[Shiftless2]

BREAKING

Pete Hegseth’s pastor just told NPR he wants to strip all American women of the right to vote. Asked why, he answered: "Because it's a good idea."

And Pete Hegseth invited him to preach at the Pentagon.

Doug Wilson leads Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho. In a sit-down interview, he said he wants the 19th Amendment gone and replaced with "household voting," where women only cast a ballot if they are the head of their household. He was blunt about who does the voting in his own home. The man.

He didn't stop at women. Wilson said non-Christians would not be allowed to hold public office in the America he wants. Asked whether they could at least vote, he said, "Yes, probably," then described restrictions on public spaces for non-Christian worship. Church bells, yes. Minarets, no.

Wilson has defended slavery in the American South as a relationship "based upon mutual affection." He believes homosexuality should be a crime. He calls himself a Christian nationalist and says his goal is to turn the United States into a Christian theocracy over the course of several generations, roughly 250 years, one school and one church plant at a time.

And this is the man Hegseth chose to put in front of the U.S. military. In February, the Secretary of Defense invited Wilson to deliver a sermon at the Pentagon, carried on internal Pentagon television, as part of a monthly Christian worship service Hegseth started at the building in 2025. About 300 people attended.

Wilson says he and Hegseth have "met a few times" and "texted some." He opened a Washington church because of how many people in the Trump administration follow his teachings. A Pentagon spokesperson has confirmed Hegseth is a member of Wilson's church network and "very much appreciates" his writings.

Wilson told NPR his vision is "closer to getting a hearing" than at any point in the 40 years he has preached it. He credits the reach he now has to the men who invited him inside the walls of American power. One of them runs the largest military on earth.

SOURCE with comments