This short dwarf midget mid-wit nigga would have been stretching himself as wide open as he could to tell you to vote DA if they didn't sack him for being an embarrassment.

"On Oct 7th I'll spend the whole day needlessly insulting entire European nations for their governments' decisions (that my gov helped bring about through IsraAid and self-serving wars) then when they get angry I'll cry out about being a victim and how anti-semitic they are."

More and more in the West childless adults are keeping pets as a substitute for children. But in reality, on a scale of growth and depth, their relationship with their animal is more akin to a child with a doll than a parent with a child.

Zuma's a common thief with no plan other than stealing for his family. He didn't invent the "state capture" he was accused of. The Guptas brought that over from Uttar Pradesh, where it's part of the system. It is Cyril's lot who developed true state capture with cadre deployment.

The way Israelis revel in the hardships and conflicts in other nations, which affect the left and right, instead of being sympathetic at a human level, reveals everything about them. They're everything they accuse others of being, and disguising it as irony isn't working anymore.

You were 1 nigger away from a mother who strangled her 3 children being declared entirely innocent

The GNU's born no fruit for SAfrica. It's retarded to think that an ANC/DA combo would improve our cities. The person who broke something isn't the person you get to fix it. I can only assume the bigwigs at Naspers have given Adriaan his marching orders: status quo ad infinitum.

Rees-Mogg actually lied through his teeth in that part of the interview: he claims that, in a treaty, America "guaranteed" Ukraine's territorial integrity, making it "inviolable", as a "quid pro quo" for giving up its nuclear weapons. This is completely false. The treaty he refers to is the so-called "1994 Budapest Memorandum", whose full text you can read here: nsarchive.gwu.edu/sites/defa… What the U.S. (alongside Russia and the UK, the other signatories) did commit to is "to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine," to refrain from the threat or use of force against it, and to refrain from economic coercion. These are promises about each signatory's own behavior: the US promised not to violate Ukraine's borders ITSELF, it did NOT guarantee their inviolability against anyone else - contrary to what Rees-Mogg is saying. Steven Pifer, one of the US negotiators, wrote about this in an article he titled "Budapest Memorandum Myths" for Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation (cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/news/…). He writes that the claim that "the United States and Britain violated their Budapest commitments by not going to war against Russia on Ukraine’s behalf" - what Rees-Mogg is essentially saying - is "a myth." In another article he wrote for CNN in 2014 (edition.cnn.com/2014/03/04/o…) the same Pifer explains that "U.S. negotiators — myself among them — discussed this point [i.e. the absence of security guarantees] in detail with Ukrainian counterparts so that there would be no misunderstanding." The only thing the U.S. (and the other signatories) committed to do if Ukraine was attacked was "to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine" - and even that only in case of an aggression "in which nuclear weapons are used." And the U.S. did go to the Security Council, but given that Russia is a permanent member of the same UN Security Council, it's of course completely useless. Rees-Mogg is also lying on the other half of the supposed "quid pro quo": the fact that Ukraine supposedly agreed to get rid of "its nuclear weapons," emphasis on the "its." The nuclear weapons on Ukrainian soil were never theirs to keep, and they never had operational control of the weapons: the launch authority was always in Moscow and, even if Ukraine had wanted to launch the weapons, they couldn't have because they didn't have the launch codes. As Ramesh Thakur, former Assistant Secretary-General of the UN, explained in a 2014 article titled "the myth of Ukraine’s nuclear deterrent" (opencanada.org/the-myth-of-u…), the bombs on Ukraine's soil "were always Russian bombs that happened to be based in Ukraine" and "were not in fact Ukrainian, any more than NATO nuclear weapons stored on West European soil or U.S. bombs that used to be kept in South Korea belonged to the countries on whose territory they were located." So there you have it, Rees-Mogg is your classic Eton-educated British politician: extremely posh and very well-spoken, supremely confident in everything he asserts, and... a shameless liar, peddling thoroughly debunked myths.

Every time an official publicly criticizes the ANC for lack of engagement and action, the ANC will say that there is official procedure that needs to be followed. This beurocratic procedure solely exists to make sure nothing changes: an age old weapon in the socialist arsenal.

The Algerians deported a million Frenchmen (born in Algeria) without any moral qualms. France can deport every last rioter (whether they are born in France or not). Citizenship is just a passport which is just a piece of paper.

Looking at it retrospectively in a purely strategic way, things would've worked out better for the UK if it had sought terms with Germany rather than sacrificing its global power and economy, only to have Russia and America win the war, and then get stabbed in the back.

I would choose German over Arabic any day of the week. But us speaking German was never a proposition to begin with. They gaslight, with their false narratives.

I’m man enough to admit that I was completely duped.

This is not how you talk about a people you love and respect. It is how you talk about a people you hate.

Rees-Mogg's stance on WWII is based on England's Elite's new foundational mythology, which assumes Hitler was intent on controlling all of Europe. If you believe that, then you'll sacrifice everything to stop it (ie. other people's children). This is also his assumption of Putin.

Perfectly encapsulates conservatism. "I don't like thing" "Are you going to do something about it?" "No."

This is the traitorous heart of Rees-Mogg, he believes in principles but only as long as they agree with his morals. This means he applies a two-faced ethics to everything where he at once sounds reasonable but has no intention of holding to convictions when they actually matter.

Few things disgust me more than non-whites telling us who we are and how we should live. What does disgust me more is white people putting up with being insulted in this way.

Everybody had a friend like this growing up

If WW2 was evaluated the way any other historical war would be, then it's obviously true that Britain's involvement in it was a poorly thought out disaster that could at best be very charitably called a pyrrhic victory. But unfortunately WW2 is the core of the self-justifying mythology of the current political order, so you never get WW2-as-history when instead you can get WW2-as-morality-play