Trump Burns 500 Tons of Food Meant for the Hungry

[Hentenza]

Which is done by Congress.

Keeping in mind that the people don't directly remove from office. . .time, Congress or the law do. . .the people directly put in office.

And vote against to remove from office.

 

[BCP1928]

Are you sure about that?

Maybe not. Perhaps an AI summary, then?

 

[Clare73]

And vote against to remove from office.

What are you thinking of there?

 

[Hentenza]

What are you thinking of there?

Same thing you said earlier. People can vote people in and vote people out. If people don’t like the GOP policies then they can vote them out in the next election. The best freedom that we have south of heaven.

 

[Always in His Presence]

That is a question to ask those that support letting the food we paid for sit and go bad and get burned rather than distribute it as was originally planned.

And also those who support the deaths of our servicemen, billions of dollars in weaponry and aircraft all in working condition.

Leaving an entire country in the hands of of terrorist, were children and woman are beaten publically and sexually abused.

 

[FreeinChrist]

And also those who support the deaths of our servicemen, billions of dollars in weaponry and aircraft all in working condition.

Leaving an entire country in the hands of of terrorist, were children and woman are beaten publically and sexually abused.

Your facts are debatable but not the topic of this thread.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Your facts are debatable but not the topic of this thread.

Thanks for not calling them stupid.

 

[Pommer]

$800,000 is $0.0008 of a trillion

Just sayin ‘

Amended, thanks.

 

[Bradskii]

No opinion. I provided a much less far left politically dramatic article but you are stuck on the drama. Drama over facts. Got it.

Again, you need to address the facts of the matter, which are plain to see. Forget about introducing any drama. Ignore any opinion. Neither changes what has happened. You can certainly offer your personal take on the matter. But base them on those facts as presented.

 

[7thKeeper]

Totally true sis. That's why when I see my fellow man hungry, thirsty, naked, a stranger, sick, or in prison, I remind them that none of us is immortal, and then I rev my Rolls-Royce to spit exhaust in their faces, and then take a bath in Dom Perignon. As the good Lord intended.

-CryptoLutheran

Meh, I merely hunt them for sport. I mean, none of us are getting out of this alive so... Why not?

 

[Bradskii]

Get legislation passed to seize our pet food for the rest of the world.

I guess that treating the matter flippantly is one way to avoid addressing it.

 

[7thKeeper]

I guess that treating the matter flippantly is one way to avoid addressing it.

Can't you just smell the love and care?

 

[Bradskii]

The voters had their say when they put them in office.

Everything else is just sounding brass and tinkling cymbal.

Wait...hang on a minute. I'm not following this line of argument. Are you actually saying that because Trump won the election then it's therefore OK to burn food and destroy medical supplies meant for those in need? That makes no sense whatsoever, but I can't see any other way of reading it.

 

[Hentenza]

Again, you need to address the facts of the matter, which are plain to see. Forget about introducing any drama. Ignore any opinion. Neither changes what has happened. You can certainly offer your personal take on the matter. But base them on those facts as presented.

You still have not read the article I posted and yet accuse me of needing to address the facts. To use your language poop or get off the pot.

 

[Bradskii]

And also those who support the deaths of our servicemen, billions of dollars in weaponry and aircraft all in working condition.

Leaving an entire country in the hands of of terrorist, were children and woman are beaten publically and sexually abused.

Hang on. Are you saying that Afghanistan was wrong AND burning food and destroying medical supplies is also wrong? You are trying your best to compare them so I guess that's what you actually mean.

 

[Bradskii]

Can't you just smell the love and care?

The thread is dripping with both. The compassion is pouring out of my screen.

 

[Bradskii]

You still have not read the article I posted and yet accuse me of needing to address the facts. To use your language poop or get off the pot.

The article that confirmed what was happening?

'The U.S. Department of State (DOS) plans to destroy a reserve of artificial contraceptives that was previously set aside for distribution in developing countries through foreign aid programs.

The stockpile, including birth control pills, condoms, and long-term implantable contraceptives, is worth more than $12 million.'

Yeah, I read that. Those are the facts of the matter. There was also some opinions on women's health versus contraception and abortion, which I already addressed.

You paid for those supplies. And the food which is also going to be destroyed. Your congress authorised the money to pay for it all, to store it and to distribute it. It would have helped countless people, mostly women and children. I don't think there's any doubt that some will die as a direct result of not receiving this aid. As you have seen, the majority of Americans support this aid. To me, that seems to be the only morally acceptable option.

You are obviously placing yourself firmly in the minority who has no problem with having it all destroyed.

 

[Hentenza]

The article that confirmed what was happening?

In a loss less political drama and with some substance.

'The U.S. Department of State (DOS) plans to destroy a reserve of artificial contraceptives that was previously set aside for distribution in developing countries through foreign aid programs.

The stockpile, including birth control pills, condoms, and long-term implantable contraceptives, is worth more than $12 million.'

Yeah, I read that. Those are the facts of the matter. There was also some opinions on women's health versus contraception and abortion, which I already addressed.

Did you read why they are going to destroy them?

You paid for those supplies. And the food which is also going to be destroyed. Your congress authorised the money to pay for it all, to store it and to distribute it. It would have helped countless people, mostly women and children. I don't think there's any doubt that some will die as a direct result of not receiving this aid. As you have seen, the majority of Americans support this aid. To me, that seems to be the only morally acceptable option.

You are obviously placing yourself firmly in the minority who has no problem with having it all destroyed.

Non responsive. Rant.

 

[Pommer]

Wait...hang on a minute. I'm not following this line of argument. Are you actually saying that because Trump won the election then it's therefore OK to burn food and destroy medical supplies meant for those in need?

The 49.8% have spoken!

 

[Bradskii]

In a loss less political drama and with some substance.

You've made your position crystal clear. No attempt to help those in need will be considered.

‘Forget them. Burn all, burn everything. Fire is bright and fire is clean.’