Hmmmm, do other "think tanks" have most of Trump's old admin and possibly new admin deeply implanted and writing the proposed policies??
Project 2025
- Thread starter basketcase
- Start date
Many people are part of many think tanks. If you're in politics, you are often in the same circles. Just like scientists and actors.
Correlation does not imply causation. ie don't be a conspiracy theorist.
Wow, that Project 2025 resonates must really bother Skoob.
Luckily, the easiest thing in the world is to just point to the program you will implement and show how this isn't the plan.
I'm sure Trump will do that any day now.
Luckily, the easiest thing in the world is to just point to the program you will implement and show how this isn't the plan.
I'm sure Trump will do that any day now.
Sure Scooby. I hear Advil works great. Just trying to help you incase you hurt anything twisting into a pretzel in the attempt to defend Project 2025 and Trump.
I don't waste my time helping others defend conspiracy theories that make them feel better.
How can it be a conspiracy theory if it is black and white with video supporting the narrative? Can we agree you have your head buried in the ground when not spinning in a rabbit hole?
Just because there is a think tank that promotes their ideals along with 100+ other think tanks that also promote their ideals, somehow the left has latched onto this one as a desperate strategy to fear monger.
Looks like it has worked on you.
Anyway, once Trump wins the election you'll see how badly you've been played by the Dems on this one.
You should be a cartoon character that runs around trying to convince everyone the sky is falling.
I've offered many times but you keep refusing to take my bet.
And yes, you have endlessly claimed that all jews in the West Bank are legitimate targets because in your racist words, "you can't tell them apart".
1) Trump is too dumb to stop the christian conservative agenda. they've already used him to get their judges appointed.
2) How dumb doe sone have to be to think Kamala is a communist. I wonder if the Trump parrots even know what the word means.
When that think tank is made up of many people connected with trump's camp, it's pretty reasonable to think a Trump victory would end up with their plan being implemented.
No, basketcase, I've asked you how Palestinians, who have a right to self defence against the illegal occupation of Palestine, can tell the difference between civilian settlers and militant settlers. You've stated its impossible, which by your metric on Palestinians in Gaza means you think Palestinians in the West Bank are justified to attack all settlers.
Personally, I'd prefer that the US supported international law and withheld all arms and aid to Israel, allow the ICJ and ICC full support and ended the genocide that is now spreading to the West Bank, Palestine.
Do you think this settler is a civilian or part of what B'tselem calls 'state policy'?
Trump could settle this immediately by talking about what policy measures in Project 2025 he disagrees with and won't implement and which he would.
He could talk about his Agenda 47 up on his website and which of those policies that overlap Project 2025 he won't be implementing using Project 2025's plans.
Of course, we know he won't ever do a policy interview, but he could still just do it in a speech.
That would assume Trump has any plan other than having people fawn over him. As we saw the last time, the 2025 people sucked up just enough to get him to sign the cheques.
Thanks for admitting once again you think it okay for Palestinians to attack civilians if they're Jews simply because other jews may be terrorists.
And despite your racist double standard, Palestinians self defense does not include attacking any Jew, just people who are directly attacking them. Amnesty and HRW agree with me on this. No matter how you phrase it, a Jew going to a restaurant, gas station, or waiting at a bus stop is never a legitimate target, even if they are in the West Bank.
AMNESTY
Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are unlawful under the provisions of international humanitarian law. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the transfer of civilians from the occupying power’s territory into the occupied territory (Article 49 (6)). However, the unlawful status of Israeli settlements does not affect the civilian status of settlers. Settlers, like any other civilians, cannot be targeted and only lose their protection from attack if and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities (Article 51 (3) Protocol 1). Similarly, Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza are civilians benefiting from the protection of the Fourth Geneva Convention unless and for such time as they take direct part in hostilities. [...]
HRW
Civilians lose their immunity from attack when and only for such time as they are directly participating in hostilities. According to guidance by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the laws of war distinguish between members of the organized fighting forces of a non-state party, who may be targeted during an armed conflict, and part-time fighters, who are civilians who may only be targeted when and only for such time as they are directly participating in hostilities. Similarly, reservists of national armed forces are considered civilians except when they go on duty, in which case they are combatants subject to attack. Fighters who leave the armed group, as well as regular army reservists who reintegrate into civilian life, are civilians until they are called back to active duty.
For an individual’s act to constitute direct participation in hostilities, it must imminently be capable of causing harm to opposing forces and must be deliberately carried out to support a party to the armed conflict. Direct participation in hostilities includes measures taken in preparation for executing the act, as well as deployment to and return from the location where the act is carried out.
Bullshit, that's not what I said.
Its really pathetic that you need to lie, to create straw man arguments.
That's all you've got left to defend the hate you feel for Palestinians.
You can't even see what you've become.
Never again means you.
Except that B'teselem says that Israel arms and uses militant settler terrorism as state policy. Which means by state policy settlers are now terrorists and not civilians. That means you are defending terrorism against the indigenous population.AMNESTY
Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are unlawful under the provisions of international humanitarian law. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the transfer of civilians from the occupying power’s territory into the occupied territory (Article 49 (6)). However, the unlawful status of Israeli settlements does not affect the civilian status of settlers. Settlers, like any other civilians, cannot be targeted and only lose their protection from attack if and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities (Article 51 (3) Protocol 1). Similarly, Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza are civilians benefiting from the protection of the Fourth Geneva Convention unless and for such time as they take direct part in hostilities. [...]
.
Settler Violence = State Violence
Since occupying the West Bank in 1967, Israel has misappropriated more than two million dunams of land (200,000 hectares) throughout the West Bank. Israel uses this land for its own purposes, including building new settlements, expanding the territory they control – including farmland and...
Again, B'tselem says settler violence is state policy. You need to stop backing terrorism and start backing the law.
Settler Violence = State Violence
Since occupying the West Bank in 1967, Israel has misappropriated more than two million dunams of land (200,000 hectares) throughout the West Bank. Israel uses this land for its own purposes, including building new settlements, expanding the territory they control – including farmland and...
I'm just pointing out he has already said he thinks a lot of it is awful and extreme.
So clearly someone (if the media actually believed in asking about policy) could ask him to specify which bits he rejects and which he wants to implement.
But obviously none of that is going to happen.
