Trump cutting funding to South Africa

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

11 minutes ago, Strike said:

ROFLMAO There you go trying to over-complicate this.  Just answer this one question - Under what circumstances would it EVER be permissible for the government to take someone's land without compensation.  If you can answer that we'll talk.  If you can't maybe sit this one out or choose the right side for once.

Oh, and @The Real timschochet, why aren't you calling out @squistion for spreading misinformation?  You're always accusing conservatives of not calling each other out.  And I believe you're against the spread of "misinformation."  If so, you should call @squistion out for clearly spreading it.  He posted a flat out lie and you just passed right over it........

1. Usually not but there are extreme examples where it can be justified. After the Civil War General Grant seized Confederate slaveholder’s land and distributed it to former slaves: “40 acres and a mule”- this was later rescinded but at the time it was a just decision. I don’t know if this current law is a just decision, doesn’t sound like it according to what you and others are saying but I’d like to see the details. Do you have them? 

2. I don’t necessarily agree with @squistion about Trump’s motivation and I said so. I also don’t agree with the presumed liberal stereotyping of all white Sourh Africans as racist and wanting to bring back Apartheid, and I wrote that as well. Not sure what else you’re referring to. 

[Strike 5,186]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

1. Usually not but there are extreme examples where it can be justified. After the Civil War General Grant seized Confederate slaveholder’s land and distributed it to former slaves: “40 acres and a mule”- this was later rescinded but at the time it was a just decision. I don’t know if this current law is a just decision, doesn’t sound like it according to what you and others are saying but I’d like to see the details. Do you have them? 

2. I don’t necessarily agree with @squistion about Trump’s motivation and I said so. I also don’t agree with the presumed liberal stereotyping of all white Sourh Africans as racist and wanting to bring back Apartheid, and I wrote that as well. Not sure what else you’re referring to. 

1)  So the answer is no. 

2)  I'm not talking about @squistion's comments on Trump's motivation.  I don't even know what he said there.  He specifically said this is just like Eminent Domain in the U.S., which as I posted above is a flat out lie.  You should call him out accordingly. 

[CaptainObvious1 324]

Civil War  

[Strike 5,186]

1 minute ago, CaptainObvious1 said:

Civil War  

And rescinded. 

[HellToupee 1,586]

Nothing here to see in SA , everything is on the up and up

https://x.com/agentleonv3/status/1886454990585127410?s=46&t=6lIrLFMCF1K0N7A7JwF7fg

South Africa

Waiting to be singed into law:

Race-based water licences.

For a farmer to have his water licence approved, he must allocate 75% and the majorty share holding of his farming business to a black partner.

The South African government and it supporters do not see anything wrong with this.

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

1)  So the answer is no. 

2)  I'm not talking about @squistion's comments on Trump's motivation.  I don't even know what he said there.  He specifically said this is just like Eminent Domain in the U.S., which as I posted above is a flat out lie.  You should call him out accordingly. 

1. No the answer is yes. I offered an example. There are others. 
 

2. @squistion offered an analogy. You pointed out why that analogy is flawed. I tend to agree with your rebuttal but that doesn’t make him a liar. You do that a lot and it’s warped thinking IMO. 

[Engorgeous George 2,126]

46 minutes ago, jbycho said:

Way off on your Africa history. The Europeans simply failed in the first place. That's why is was named "The Dark Continent" It:s not because of skin color, it's because it's pretty much impenetrable. Sure, they pushed their will into some places, but overall failed. NOTHING like what happened in this country other than the people who were here, and those there in Africa, were flat out savages. And here, the migrated indians were nearly 90% nomadic. They didn't claim territories. They simply slaughtered opposing tribes if they felt like it. And a lot of the same happens in recent history in Africa.

My African history comes mostly from the Miniseries Shaka Zulu.  Maybe a bit of supplimentation from King Julian from Madagascar.

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

I’m living on land that was seized from the Mexican government without compensation. 

[CaptainObvious1 324]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

I’m living on land that was seized from the Mexican government without compensation. 

I think you should give it to a bad hombre out of guilt and then you can pick fruit or install drywall for $50/day.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,932]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’m living on land that was seized from the Mexican government without compensation. 

Any land except Israel that Jews own is stolen then.  Let’s play this out. 

[Strike 5,186]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

1. No the answer is yes. I offered an example. There are others. 
 

2. @squistion offered an analogy. You pointed out why that analogy is flawed. I tend to agree with your rebuttal but that doesn’t make him a liar. You do that a lot and it’s warped thinking IMO. 

1)  You weren't even right with the example you cited.   I looked it up.   And that is still not a permissible time for the government to take someone's land.

2)   You're wrong here.  Just remember this the next time you try to call out a conservative for not calling out another conservative. 

[Mark Davis 339]

I'm not a fan of foreign aid in general, but definitely not to a country who is seizing private land.

[League Champion 1,896]

This is good for the US 

[jbycho 590]

42 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’m living on land that was seized from the Mexican government without compensation. 

Who cares?

[TheNewGirl 1,347]

47 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’m living on land that was seized from the Mexican government without compensation. 

You should give it back. Or give it to the illegals that you hire. 

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

50 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

You should give it back. Or give it to the illegals that you hire. 

I’ll think about this and let you know. 

[jbycho 590]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’ll think about this and let you know. 

Liar. 

[Mark Davis 339]

And just like that another $440MM saved. Or put in better terms, $440MM our kids don’t have to borrow and owe China. 

[Cdub100 3,837]

1 hour ago, HellToupee said:

Nothing here to see in SA , everything is on the up and up

https://x.com/agentleonv3/status/1886454990585127410?s=46&t=6lIrLFMCF1K0N7A7JwF7fg

South Africa

Waiting to be singed into law:

Race-based water licences.

For a farmer to have his water licence approved, he must allocate 75% and the majorty share holding of his farming business to a black partner.

The South African government and it supporters do not see anything wrong with this.

The SA Government is actively taking land and killing white farmers. 

I've pointed it out before but because tabloids like CNN don't report it, nobody cares.

[weepaws 3,155]

5 minutes ago, Mark Davis said:

And just like that another $440MM saved. Or put in better terms, $440MM our kids don’t have to borrow and owe China. 

Nice.  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,932]

I like how whenever Trump does something no one saw coming our leftards here are automatically experts on the subject. No matter what it is. Clowns. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,833]

2 hours ago, HellToupee said:

Nothing here to see in SA , everything is on the up and up

https://x.com/agentleonv3/status/1886454990585127410?s=46&t=6lIrLFMCF1K0N7A7JwF7fg

South Africa

Waiting to be singed into law:

Race-based water licences.

For a farmer to have his water licence approved, he must allocate 75% and the majorty share holding of his farming business to a black partner.

The South African government and it supporters do not see anything wrong with this.

That's why I keep pointing to SA when I say this is what DEI and Equity lead to.  It's never been about "equality", it's always been about revenge.  When they guilt enough whites into giving them power the masks come off and revenge is the order of the day.  Make no mistake, this is what all of that leads to.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,833]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

I’m living on land that was seized from the Mexican government without compensation. 

Then why aren't you voluntarily giving it up?  Oh, that's right, that's what you want others to do but not yourself.

All talk and no action.  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,833]

12 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

The SA Government is actively taking land and killing white farmers. 

I've pointed it out before but because tabloids like CNN don't report it, nobody cares.

Me and Cdub have been on the front lines of this argument.

It's always about revenge and payback.  Always.

[Mike Hunt 261]

This thread is not going how Squid wanted it to...but none of his threads do.

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

In any event I’ve come to believe that with Trump none of his announcements actually come true until they actually come true. Case in point the tariffs. So probably there will be some meeting between South Africa’s President and Trump, and some sort of promise or bribe will be made, and the money will go through. 

[CaptainObvious1 324]

8 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

In any event I’ve come to believe that with Trump none of his announcements actually come true until they actually come true. Case in point the tariffs. So probably there will be some meeting between South Africa’s President and Trump, and some sort of promise or bribe will be made, and the money will go through. 

We call that the Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden negotiation

[Cdub100 3,837]

40 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Me and Cdub have been on the front lines of this argument.

It's always about revenge and payback.  Always.

I think I told this story, but if I haven't... I met a SA farmer at the Atlanta airport in 2014/15. He said things were getting bad there. Very ugly. He was going to one of the Dakota to buy some farmland and move his family to potentially. Seemed like a super nice guy. I hope he made it out.

To your point, yes it's about revenge. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,483]

2 hours ago, TheNewGirl said:

You should give it back. Or give it to the illegals that you hire. 

He can't do that... because if he did, then he'd have to practice what he preached.  He'd just rather virtue signal and sound like the good guy when all he's doing is saying, "you should listen to me, but I don't have to do it".  It's like all those liberal dopes on college campus' that say socialism is better than capitalism or that they support DEI because of white privilege.  But then if you ask them to give up their scholarship or grant money to a non-white person, all of a sudden it's "Well, I shouldn't have to because...." or "Well, I earned my spot....".   It should always be someone else that has to give up, not them.  Then they sit there and condemn people who don't agree with them.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,833]

21 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

I think I told this story, but if I haven't... I met a SA farmer at the Atlanta airport in 2014/15. He said things were getting bad there. Very ugly. He was going to one of the Dakota to buy some farmland and move his family to potentially. Seemed like a super nice guy. I hope he made it out.

To your point, yes it's about revenge. 

It's very scary.  Now imagine this was a bunch of white people doing it today to black people.  Tim and everyone on the left would have started 10K threads about it and been out of their minds.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

1 minute ago, TBayXXXVII said:

He can't do that... because if he did, then he'd have to practice what he preached.  He'd just rather virtue signal and sound like the good guy when all he's doing is saying, "you should listen to me, but I don't have to do it".  It's like all those liberal dopes on college campus' that say socialism is better than capitalism or that they support DEI because of white privilege.  But then if you ask them to give up their scholarship or grant money to a non-white person, all of a sudden it's "Well, I shouldn't have to because...." or "Well, I earned my spot....".   It should always be someone else that has to give up, not them.  Then they sit there and condemn people who don't agree with them.

I always love to be psychoanalyzed. But the answer is much simpler: I’m not giving it back because it was stolen fair and square and the people it was stolen from are all dead. I don’t believe in reparations unless you were alive to be wronged. 
 

The only reason I wrote that was to contradict @Strike’s  absurd absolutism about land ownership. There is nothing absolute about this subject. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,483]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

I always love to be psychoanalyzed. But the answer is much simpler: I’m not giving it back because it was stolen fair and square and the people it was stolen from are all dead. I don’t believe in reparations unless you were alive to be wronged. 
 

The only reason I wrote that was to contradict @Strike’s  absurd absolutism about land ownership. There is nothing absolute about this subject. 

Then you're voting and supporting the wrong side.

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

2 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Then you're voting and supporting the wrong side.

Not on the issues that matter most to me 

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

As I suspected the details of this bill have not been represented correctly in this thread: 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg9w4n6gp5o

The government can only seize land “if the  property is not being used, there has been no effort to develop it and make money from it, or it poses a risk to people.” Further it can’t be done unless the government has tried and failed to reach an agreement with the owner. 
 

Given the inequities of land ownership in South Africa how is this unreasonable? That doesn’t mean I’m necessarily for this law, but the idea being spread around of white farmers being thrown off their land as an act of revenge seems like total nonsense spread by the usual subjects here (I.E. white supremacist liars like @Cdub100) 

[Cdub100 3,837]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

As I suspected the details of this bill have not been represented correctly in this thread: 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg9w4n6gp5o

The government can only seize land “if the  property is not being used, there has been no effort to develop it and make money from it, or it poses a risk to people.” Further it can’t be done unless the government has tried and failed to reach an agreement with the owner. 
 

Given the inequities of land ownership in South Africa how is this unreasonable? That doesn’t mean I’m necessarily for this law, but the idea being spread around of white farmers being thrown off their land as an act of revenge seems like total nonsense spread by the usual subjects here (I.E. white supremacist liars like @Cdub100) 

#1 It's not happening

 

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

Just now, Cdub100 said:

#1 It's not happening

 

If you assert something that is opposite of what the news is reporting, it’s up to you to prove the news is wrong. 

[Cdub100 3,837]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

If you assert something that is opposite of what the news is reporting, it’s up to you to prove the news is wrong. 

You don't follow the news. You follow tabloids.

[The Real timschochet 6,416]

Just now, Cdub100 said:

You don't follow the news. You follow tabloids.

I linked to the BBC because it was the only reputable source I could find that had details about the law in question. So far as I know the BBC isn’t a tabloid. You’re welcome to present a contradictory source if you have one. 

[League Champion 1,896]

5 hours ago, thegeneral said:

President Elon pulling the strings of his puppet. Amazing what a quarter of a billion can buy you.

This is great news. Choke them out till they come correct. 

[Strike 5,186]

35 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

As I suspected the details of this bill have not been represented correctly in this thread: 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg9w4n6gp5o

The government can only seize land “if the  property is not being used, there has been no effort to develop it and make money from it, or it poses a risk to people.” Further it can’t be done unless the government has tried and failed to reach an agreement with the owner. 
 

Given the inequities of land ownership in South Africa how is this unreasonable? That doesn’t mean I’m necessarily for this law, but the idea being spread around of white farmers being thrown off their land as an act of revenge seems like total nonsense spread by the usual subjects here (I.E. white supremacist liars like @Cdub100) 

 

There you go again.  You misquoted your own focking article!!!!  Here is the full quote:

Quote

This includes if the property is not being used and there's no intention to either develop or make money from it or when it poses a risk to people.

I wonder why you chose to cut out the first couple of words from that sentence when you quoted it.  No, I really don't  LOL.  So in addition to the circumstances you list, they can steal people's land for other unspecified reasons too.  Your article proves nothing.  Probably why even they concede in their headline that the law is controversial.