Do You Think It's Odd That Trump Has Stayed Silent On The Quebec City Terrorist Attack?

[sp1814]

He was (very rightly) quick off the mark with the Louvre attack, but seems reluctant to publicly condemn the other terrorist attack of last week.

This seems strange - especially for a man who seems to spend a shockingly large amount of time posting his thoughts on Twitter.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/quebec-mosque-louvre-attack-islamist-terror-white-donald-trump-twitter-muslim-ban-judge-a7563306.html

[naomi24]

So you're all party to what's said between him and his staff and to what instructions he issues. What utter nonsense this really is!

[andy-hughes]

The 'So' rule strikes again.

It's this simple Naomi - when an actress makes a veiled criticism of President Trump, his fingers are on he keyboard to Tweet so fast there is smoke rising - but when it comes to opinionating about a terror attack that does not conform with his rigid racist stereotyping, he remains oddly silent.

What is 'people' do or do not put out is not the issue - it is the fact that the President uses the common-or-garden gossip-fest that is TwitFace to spout his every waking thought when it suits him, and not when it doesn't.

That is the point that is being made, and your continued reluctance to accept this simply underlines the point even further.

[Zacs-Master]

Another case of the lady protesting too much.

[-Talbot-]

Talbot - // He hasn't stayed silent ... On The Quebec City Terrorist Attack. //

Actually - he has.

His office haven't - but he has, and that is the important distinction that is being pointed out.





Do you ever bother to read threads properly?
do you other to read the links posted?
He has not Stayed Silent On The Quebec City Terrorist Attack

[-Talbot-]

^ bother

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, your ‘so rule’ is as ridiculous as the oft-quoted Godwin’s Law.

Zacs-Master, if attempting to inject a little sanity into what has become an utterly ludicrous thread can be considered ‘protesting’, then yes, I am protesting.

The fact is Donald Trump called the Canadian Prime Minister personally to offer his condolences and he instructed his staff to issue a press release to the rest of the world along similar lines. The OP was wrong, The Independent report to which he linked was wrong, and the people here who are consistently claiming that Trump remained silent are also wrong. He didn’t. Jeepers, it's hard work on here at times!

[sp1814]

naomi24

Looking forward to Trump's next important tweet.

Perhaps it will be criticism of Britney's new look, or something about cheese.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi – your post at 16:33 - //So you're all party to what's said between him and his staff and to what instructions he issues. //

No, I don’t think anyone has claimed to know what President Trump says to anyone, including his staff.

Well, no-one until you that is, at 19:20 - // … and he instructed his staff to issue a press release to the rest of the world along similar lines. //

So it’s not OK for anyone else to assume they know how President Trump briefs his team behind closed doors, but it’s fine when you do it.

As you also said at 16:33 - // What utter nonsense this really is! //

Now there, I would absolutely agree with you - but you have to hold your hands up on occasions like this, when the nonsense is yours.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - //andy-hughes, your ‘so rule’ is as ridiculous as the oft-quoted Godwin’s Law. //

But the difference is, Mr Godwin isn't on here to see when his Law punctures the egos of the overly self-important - but I'm here to see when my 'So' rule hits its target.

Bullseye!!

[Jackdaw33]

This is the second thread I have read this evening which is peppered with insulting ad hominem attacks from a-h.

[andy-hughes]

Jackdaw - the 'Report' button is just to the right of any posts which you think are 'ad hominem attacks' - but I am sure you already know that.

[Khandro]

*










*






//Looking forward to Trump's next important tweet.
Perhaps it will be criticism of Britney's new look, or something about cheese.//

I don't think so, but I wouldn't wish to destroy your illusion, hang in there and let us know.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //I'm here to see when my 'So' rule hits its target. //

But it doesn't. Your perception, like your 'rule' is a figment of your imagination.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - Sure, let's go with that.

[Jackdaw33]

"The egos of the overly self-important"

Hmmm, who possibly can he mean?

[naomi24]

Yes, let's.

[naomi24]

^That was to andy-hughes.

[andy-hughes]

jacdaw - //"The egos of the overly self-important"

Hmmm, who possibly can he mean? //

Don't worry - they know who they are!

[Jackdaw33]

Irony not your strong point, then.