By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Couldn't you guys have kept him there? He really doesn't have to come back here. We're perfectly capable of governing ourselves without him running around.
1
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 06:29 - Jul 14 with 2756 views
Before I start I'd like to point out I haven't read the sun article, I haven't heard Trumps speech and I am basing this opinion just on what I've heard people say. So I could well be wrong.
Now the Sun are lying bastards and the things they've reported him saying they may well have on tape but 'fake news' also applies to when the news lies by omission. Maybe the great one is saying that he feels his attitude to the Maybot was misrepresented and the Sun chose to heavily slant the article by choosing to report only the negative things he said. Therefore they are not lying about the things they wrote but are being dishonest by presenting him as overly negative to her. Of course, being Trump he wouldn't take time to explain that he'd just say "Fake news". On the other hand I'm willing to say they may have reported exactly what he said and he's dismissed it as fake news
Have we heard the full interview? Or is it available for us to hear? as I said I'm out of this loop.
Good luck, Mr Cooper
-1
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 06:43 - Jul 14 with 2750 views
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 06:29 - Jul 14 by Mo_Wives
Before I start I'd like to point out I haven't read the sun article, I haven't heard Trumps speech and I am basing this opinion just on what I've heard people say. So I could well be wrong.
Now the Sun are lying bastards and the things they've reported him saying they may well have on tape but 'fake news' also applies to when the news lies by omission. Maybe the great one is saying that he feels his attitude to the Maybot was misrepresented and the Sun chose to heavily slant the article by choosing to report only the negative things he said. Therefore they are not lying about the things they wrote but are being dishonest by presenting him as overly negative to her. Of course, being Trump he wouldn't take time to explain that he'd just say "Fake news". On the other hand I'm willing to say they may have reported exactly what he said and he's dismissed it as fake news
Have we heard the full interview? Or is it available for us to hear? as I said I'm out of this loop.
He said it.
Sounds like twaats like Farage had fed him the lines. He has now apologised and changed his position.
Equally strange is the Maybot holding his hand again. Very strange.
Beware of the Risen People
1
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 06:51 - Jul 14 with 2747 views
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 06:43 - Jul 14 by Kilkennyjack
He said it.
Sounds like twaats like Farage had fed him the lines. He has now apologised and changed his position.
Equally strange is the Maybot holding his hand again. Very strange.
Yes, my point was not that he didn't say it (what is it he said, btw? I'm out of the loop) my point was maybe he said good things about her and bad things about her and he feels they are only reporting the bad. Hence he is calling them dishonest in the way they framed his attitude towards her rather than saying he didn't say what they say he said.
Have you heard the full interview? serious question...would like to see it for myself.
And as you say "Equally strange is the Maybot holding his hand again." When things don't make sense they are often not true or you are missing vital information.
Good luck, Mr Cooper
-1
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 10:30 - Jul 14 with 2701 views
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 19:47 - Jul 13 by Shaky
Wow, didn't think anybody could ever rival Penny in the stupidity stakes, but here you are!
You are the attention seeking clown typing out long statements trying to impress strangers on a football forum, keep it short and sweet mun , however if I am wrong, and you have issues and need to talk which could be a strong possibility pm me and I`ll set you up with a mate of mine who is an excellent psychologist.
[Post edited 14 Jul 2018 18:06]
-1
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 18:09 - Jul 14 with 2625 views
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 18:05 - Jul 14 by perplex
You are the attention seeking clown typing out long statements trying to impress strangers on a football forum, keep it short and sweet mun , however if I am wrong, and you have issues and need to talk which could be a strong possibility pm me and I`ll set you up with a mate of mine who is an excellent psychologist.
[Post edited 14 Jul 2018 18:06]
So you genuinely think Shaky typed all that out? If so mate, perhaps time you gave up on this internet lark as it may not be for you. Alternatively, I know of some free beginner IT courses being run in the area, PM me if you want me to send you the details.
You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocket ship underpants don't help.
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 18:05 - Jul 14 by perplex
You are the attention seeking clown typing out long statements trying to impress strangers on a football forum, keep it short and sweet mun , however if I am wrong, and you have issues and need to talk which could be a strong possibility pm me and I`ll set you up with a mate of mine who is an excellent psychologist.
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 19:00 - Jul 14 by Shaky
Perplex - Just to be clear I wrote that song, made a video of it, and uploaded it to YouTube, all just for you.
xx
So you have gay tendencies, nothing wrong with that I suppose, but how you can develop a crush on a fellow forum poster is a bit strange, however I would certainly not want to see you, you will have to go and fantasise over one of the others guys but be warned, you keep making long boring and drawn out posts your chances of pulling will be very low to say the least.
-1
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 05:34 - Jul 15 with 2510 views
You seem to have quite a following . I d like to be in your gang.
As for Trump, I'm no fan but he hasn't done what many recent presidents have done and sent thousands of his own people to foreign lands to get slaughtered for nothing
-1
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 13:25 - Jul 15 with 2408 views
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 10:04 - Jul 15 by moonie
Gay crushes! How very seventies .
Have we ever fallen out Mo ?
You seem to have quite a following . I d like to be in your gang.
As for Trump, I'm no fan but he hasn't done what many recent presidents have done and sent thousands of his own people to foreign lands to get slaughtered for nothing
We haven't ever fallen out, Perch. And I feel Mr Glitter killed off the appeal of joining a gang. It's a shame. He destroyed all that good work done by West Side Story.
Good luck, Mr Cooper
-1
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 14:55 - Jul 16 with 2338 views
NATO’s global peace is unraveling and we can’t see it Robert Kagan
Brookings Institute, Sunday, July 15, 2018
Human beings often choose self-delusion over painful reality, and so in the days and weeks to come, we will hear reassurances that the NATO alliance is in good shape. After all, there have been spats in the past–over the Suez crisis in 1956, Vietnam in the 1960s and ’70s, missile deployment in the Reagan years and, of course, Iraq. American presidents have been complaining about shortfalls in European defense spending for decades. President Trump is not wrong to criticize Germany’s pipeline deal with Russia. As for this week’s fractious summit, we are urged to focus on the substance, not the rhetoric. U.S. forces in Europe have been beefed up in recent years, and new plans are in place to resist Russian aggression. On the ground, the alliance still functions.
All true, but unfortunately beside the point. Small troop deployments and incremental defense increases don’t mean much when the foundations of the alliance are crumbling–as they are and have been for some time. And pointing to previous differences ignores how much political and international circumstances have changed over the past decade. Europe faces new problems, as well as the return of some of the old problems that led to catastrophe in the past; and Americans have a very different attitude toward the world than they did during the Cold War. This is not just another family quarrel.
The transatlantic community was in trouble even before Trump took office. The peaceful, democratic Europe we had come to take for granted in recent decades has been rocked to the core by populist nationalist movements responding to the massive flow of refugees from the Middle East and Africa. For the first time since World War II , a right-wing party holds a substantial share of seats in the German Bundestag. Authoritarianism has replaced democracy, or threatens to, in such major European states as Hungary and Poland, and democratic practices and liberal values are under attack in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. France remains one election away from a right-wing nationalist leadership, and Italy has already taken a big step in that direction. Meanwhile, Britain, which played such a key role in Europe during and after the Cold War, has taken itself out of the picture and has become, globally, a pale shadow of its former self. The possibility that Europe could return to its dark past is greater today than at any time during the Cold War.
Some of that has to do with the changing attitude of the United States in recent years. It’s little secret that President Barack Obama had no great interest in Europe. Obama, like Trump, spoke of allied “free riders,” and his “pivot” to Asia was widely regarded by Europeans as a pivot away from them. Obama rattled Eastern Europe in his early years by canceling planned missile-defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic as an inducement to Vladimir Putin to embrace a “reset” of relations. In his later years he rattled Western Europe when he did not enforce his famous “red lines” in Syria. Both actions raised doubts about American reliability, and the Obama administration’s refusal to take action in Syria to stem the flow of refugees contributed heavily to the present strain.
Obama was only doing what he thought the American people wanted. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with the 2008 financial crisis, left Americans disenchanted with global involvement and receptive to arguments that the alliances and institutions they supported for all those years no longer served their interests. The Obama administration tried to pare back the American role without abandoning the liberal world order, hoping it was more self-sustaining than it turned out to be. But the path was open to a politician willing to exploit Americans’ disenchantment, which is precisely what Trump did in 2016.
NATO has never been a self-operating machine that simply chugs ahead so long as it is left alone. Like the liberal world order of which it is the core, it requires constant tending, above all by the United States. And because it is a voluntary alliance of democratic peoples, it survives on a foundation of public support. That foundation has been cracking in recent years. This week was an opportunity to shore it up. Instead, Trump took a sledgehammer to it.
Never mind the final communique that Trump deigned to sign, or his reassurance at the end that the alliance was “very unified, very strong, no problem,” and or his claim that “I believe in NATO.” In his press comments alongside NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, in his tweets and in his private comments to European leaders, Trump made clear that he does not believe in NATO. In fact, he used this summit to lay out for the American people why NATO was not only “obsolete,” as he once said, but also a rotten deal for them.
Consider the question of allied military spending. As many pointed out, Trump could have come to Brussels and taken credit for the increased commitments that the Allies have made–and of course he did force Stoltenberg to give him credit. But then he moved the goal posts. He insisted the 2 percent of gross domestic product mark must be reached not by 2024, as agreed by the alliance (including the United States), but by January–something he knows is impossible. Then he went further, insisting that the allies spend 4 percent of their GDP on defense, higher even than his own defense budget.
These are not negotiating tactics. They are the tactics of someone who does not want a deal. In the private meeting, Trump is reported to have warned the allies that if they did not meet the 2 percent standard by January the United States would “go it alone.” To Stoltenberg he publicly warned that the United States was “not going to put up with it.” Whether he has any intention of making good on such threats scarcely matters. In his tweets, he asked, “What good is NATO” if Germany was paying Russia for gas? Why should the United States pay billions to “subsidize Europe” while it was losing “Big on Trade”? Those comments were not aimed at Europe. They were designed to discredit the alliance in the eyes of his faithful throng back home.
But even Trump must know the likely response in Europe. The insults and humiliations he inflicted on allied leaders will not be forgotten or forgiven. They will make it impossible for European leaders to win public support for the spending Trump disingenuously claims to want. What German leader after such a tongue-lashing could do Trump’s bidding and hope to survive politically?
Any student of history knows that it is moments like this summit that set in motion chains of events that are difficult to stop. The democratic alliance that has been the bedrock of the American-led liberal world order is unraveling. At some point, and probably sooner than we expect, the global peace that that alliance and that order undergirded will unravel, too. Despite our human desire to hope for the best, things will not be okay. The world crisis is upon us.
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 14:55 - Jul 16 by Shaky
NATO’s global peace is unraveling and we can’t see it Robert Kagan
Brookings Institute, Sunday, July 15, 2018
Human beings often choose self-delusion over painful reality, and so in the days and weeks to come, we will hear reassurances that the NATO alliance is in good shape. After all, there have been spats in the past–over the Suez crisis in 1956, Vietnam in the 1960s and ’70s, missile deployment in the Reagan years and, of course, Iraq. American presidents have been complaining about shortfalls in European defense spending for decades. President Trump is not wrong to criticize Germany’s pipeline deal with Russia. As for this week’s fractious summit, we are urged to focus on the substance, not the rhetoric. U.S. forces in Europe have been beefed up in recent years, and new plans are in place to resist Russian aggression. On the ground, the alliance still functions.
All true, but unfortunately beside the point. Small troop deployments and incremental defense increases don’t mean much when the foundations of the alliance are crumbling–as they are and have been for some time. And pointing to previous differences ignores how much political and international circumstances have changed over the past decade. Europe faces new problems, as well as the return of some of the old problems that led to catastrophe in the past; and Americans have a very different attitude toward the world than they did during the Cold War. This is not just another family quarrel.
The transatlantic community was in trouble even before Trump took office. The peaceful, democratic Europe we had come to take for granted in recent decades has been rocked to the core by populist nationalist movements responding to the massive flow of refugees from the Middle East and Africa. For the first time since World War II , a right-wing party holds a substantial share of seats in the German Bundestag. Authoritarianism has replaced democracy, or threatens to, in such major European states as Hungary and Poland, and democratic practices and liberal values are under attack in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. France remains one election away from a right-wing nationalist leadership, and Italy has already taken a big step in that direction. Meanwhile, Britain, which played such a key role in Europe during and after the Cold War, has taken itself out of the picture and has become, globally, a pale shadow of its former self. The possibility that Europe could return to its dark past is greater today than at any time during the Cold War.
Some of that has to do with the changing attitude of the United States in recent years. It’s little secret that President Barack Obama had no great interest in Europe. Obama, like Trump, spoke of allied “free riders,” and his “pivot” to Asia was widely regarded by Europeans as a pivot away from them. Obama rattled Eastern Europe in his early years by canceling planned missile-defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic as an inducement to Vladimir Putin to embrace a “reset” of relations. In his later years he rattled Western Europe when he did not enforce his famous “red lines” in Syria. Both actions raised doubts about American reliability, and the Obama administration’s refusal to take action in Syria to stem the flow of refugees contributed heavily to the present strain.
Obama was only doing what he thought the American people wanted. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with the 2008 financial crisis, left Americans disenchanted with global involvement and receptive to arguments that the alliances and institutions they supported for all those years no longer served their interests. The Obama administration tried to pare back the American role without abandoning the liberal world order, hoping it was more self-sustaining than it turned out to be. But the path was open to a politician willing to exploit Americans’ disenchantment, which is precisely what Trump did in 2016.
NATO has never been a self-operating machine that simply chugs ahead so long as it is left alone. Like the liberal world order of which it is the core, it requires constant tending, above all by the United States. And because it is a voluntary alliance of democratic peoples, it survives on a foundation of public support. That foundation has been cracking in recent years. This week was an opportunity to shore it up. Instead, Trump took a sledgehammer to it.
Never mind the final communique that Trump deigned to sign, or his reassurance at the end that the alliance was “very unified, very strong, no problem,” and or his claim that “I believe in NATO.” In his press comments alongside NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, in his tweets and in his private comments to European leaders, Trump made clear that he does not believe in NATO. In fact, he used this summit to lay out for the American people why NATO was not only “obsolete,” as he once said, but also a rotten deal for them.
Consider the question of allied military spending. As many pointed out, Trump could have come to Brussels and taken credit for the increased commitments that the Allies have made–and of course he did force Stoltenberg to give him credit. But then he moved the goal posts. He insisted the 2 percent of gross domestic product mark must be reached not by 2024, as agreed by the alliance (including the United States), but by January–something he knows is impossible. Then he went further, insisting that the allies spend 4 percent of their GDP on defense, higher even than his own defense budget.
These are not negotiating tactics. They are the tactics of someone who does not want a deal. In the private meeting, Trump is reported to have warned the allies that if they did not meet the 2 percent standard by January the United States would “go it alone.” To Stoltenberg he publicly warned that the United States was “not going to put up with it.” Whether he has any intention of making good on such threats scarcely matters. In his tweets, he asked, “What good is NATO” if Germany was paying Russia for gas? Why should the United States pay billions to “subsidize Europe” while it was losing “Big on Trade”? Those comments were not aimed at Europe. They were designed to discredit the alliance in the eyes of his faithful throng back home.
But even Trump must know the likely response in Europe. The insults and humiliations he inflicted on allied leaders will not be forgotten or forgiven. They will make it impossible for European leaders to win public support for the spending Trump disingenuously claims to want. What German leader after such a tongue-lashing could do Trump’s bidding and hope to survive politically?
Any student of history knows that it is moments like this summit that set in motion chains of events that are difficult to stop. The democratic alliance that has been the bedrock of the American-led liberal world order is unraveling. At some point, and probably sooner than we expect, the global peace that that alliance and that order undergirded will unravel, too. Despite our human desire to hope for the best, things will not be okay. The world crisis is upon us.
The thing is, it is the EU that is undermining NATO and it is the intelligentsia in Europe who have long been arguing that NATO is superfluous now.
The chattering classes of Europe have long been articulating that they wish to be free of American shackles (whilst hypocritically hiding behind US defence as regards Russia). Even when the US has directly demanded that all NATO members pay their subs, still they resist. They might just get exactly what they have been hoping for. After all, it is in the US' interests to re-orientate it's defence policy to the Pacific.
Why should Americans pay for the defence of and send their young men to die for, the ungrateful Europeans.
...and yes it is worrying, and yes this will make Europe's position precarious. Some of us have been arguing this all along. Your European leaders have led you to this point, this outcome is desirable to them. It is why they have been planning for a European army...'Remain' told bare faced lies about this during the EU referendum of course.
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 15:15 - Jul 16 by Kerouac
The thing is, it is the EU that is undermining NATO and it is the intelligentsia in Europe who have long been arguing that NATO is superfluous now.
The chattering classes of Europe have long been articulating that they wish to be free of American shackles (whilst hypocritically hiding behind US defence as regards Russia). Even when the US has directly demanded that all NATO members pay their subs, still they resist. They might just get exactly what they have been hoping for. After all, it is in the US' interests to re-orientate it's defence policy to the Pacific.
Why should Americans pay for the defence of and send their young men to die for, the ungrateful Europeans.
...and yes it is worrying, and yes this will make Europe's position precarious. Some of us have been arguing this all along. Your European leaders have led you to this point, this outcome is desirable to them. It is why they have been planning for a European army...'Remain' told bare faced lies about this during the EU referendum of course.
The EU is arguing that NATO is superfluous?
Hardly, and as the article notes Trump's latest moves to torpedo the alliance are but the most recent manifestations of increasing US isolationism since the various Neocon projects to reshape the world all turned to shit during Bush II.
So with full US backing, the rational European response has for some years been for closer defence cooperation to share the spending burden; modern defence systems are an area with considerable economies of scale.
And that burden can only increase dramatically if the US does pull out, raising all sorts of stakes significantly, with an almost certain need for Europe to independently invest to replace US strategic nuclear forces. That will cost megabucks quite apart from obviously significantly increasing nuclear proliferation and making the world a much more dangerous place.
And we can only hope that some time well before the many Brexiter fantasists who dream of an Anglospere united in trade and defence will have come to their collective senses or alternatively died from old age.
There's some serious shit going down, and if you think the US is going to come to Britain's aid you are a dangerous idiot.
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 14:55 - Jul 16 by Shaky
NATO’s global peace is unraveling and we can’t see it Robert Kagan
Brookings Institute, Sunday, July 15, 2018
Human beings often choose self-delusion over painful reality, and so in the days and weeks to come, we will hear reassurances that the NATO alliance is in good shape. After all, there have been spats in the past–over the Suez crisis in 1956, Vietnam in the 1960s and ’70s, missile deployment in the Reagan years and, of course, Iraq. American presidents have been complaining about shortfalls in European defense spending for decades. President Trump is not wrong to criticize Germany’s pipeline deal with Russia. As for this week’s fractious summit, we are urged to focus on the substance, not the rhetoric. U.S. forces in Europe have been beefed up in recent years, and new plans are in place to resist Russian aggression. On the ground, the alliance still functions.
All true, but unfortunately beside the point. Small troop deployments and incremental defense increases don’t mean much when the foundations of the alliance are crumbling–as they are and have been for some time. And pointing to previous differences ignores how much political and international circumstances have changed over the past decade. Europe faces new problems, as well as the return of some of the old problems that led to catastrophe in the past; and Americans have a very different attitude toward the world than they did during the Cold War. This is not just another family quarrel.
The transatlantic community was in trouble even before Trump took office. The peaceful, democratic Europe we had come to take for granted in recent decades has been rocked to the core by populist nationalist movements responding to the massive flow of refugees from the Middle East and Africa. For the first time since World War II , a right-wing party holds a substantial share of seats in the German Bundestag. Authoritarianism has replaced democracy, or threatens to, in such major European states as Hungary and Poland, and democratic practices and liberal values are under attack in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. France remains one election away from a right-wing nationalist leadership, and Italy has already taken a big step in that direction. Meanwhile, Britain, which played such a key role in Europe during and after the Cold War, has taken itself out of the picture and has become, globally, a pale shadow of its former self. The possibility that Europe could return to its dark past is greater today than at any time during the Cold War.
Some of that has to do with the changing attitude of the United States in recent years. It’s little secret that President Barack Obama had no great interest in Europe. Obama, like Trump, spoke of allied “free riders,” and his “pivot” to Asia was widely regarded by Europeans as a pivot away from them. Obama rattled Eastern Europe in his early years by canceling planned missile-defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic as an inducement to Vladimir Putin to embrace a “reset” of relations. In his later years he rattled Western Europe when he did not enforce his famous “red lines” in Syria. Both actions raised doubts about American reliability, and the Obama administration’s refusal to take action in Syria to stem the flow of refugees contributed heavily to the present strain.
Obama was only doing what he thought the American people wanted. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with the 2008 financial crisis, left Americans disenchanted with global involvement and receptive to arguments that the alliances and institutions they supported for all those years no longer served their interests. The Obama administration tried to pare back the American role without abandoning the liberal world order, hoping it was more self-sustaining than it turned out to be. But the path was open to a politician willing to exploit Americans’ disenchantment, which is precisely what Trump did in 2016.
NATO has never been a self-operating machine that simply chugs ahead so long as it is left alone. Like the liberal world order of which it is the core, it requires constant tending, above all by the United States. And because it is a voluntary alliance of democratic peoples, it survives on a foundation of public support. That foundation has been cracking in recent years. This week was an opportunity to shore it up. Instead, Trump took a sledgehammer to it.
Never mind the final communique that Trump deigned to sign, or his reassurance at the end that the alliance was “very unified, very strong, no problem,” and or his claim that “I believe in NATO.” In his press comments alongside NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, in his tweets and in his private comments to European leaders, Trump made clear that he does not believe in NATO. In fact, he used this summit to lay out for the American people why NATO was not only “obsolete,” as he once said, but also a rotten deal for them.
Consider the question of allied military spending. As many pointed out, Trump could have come to Brussels and taken credit for the increased commitments that the Allies have made–and of course he did force Stoltenberg to give him credit. But then he moved the goal posts. He insisted the 2 percent of gross domestic product mark must be reached not by 2024, as agreed by the alliance (including the United States), but by January–something he knows is impossible. Then he went further, insisting that the allies spend 4 percent of their GDP on defense, higher even than his own defense budget.
These are not negotiating tactics. They are the tactics of someone who does not want a deal. In the private meeting, Trump is reported to have warned the allies that if they did not meet the 2 percent standard by January the United States would “go it alone.” To Stoltenberg he publicly warned that the United States was “not going to put up with it.” Whether he has any intention of making good on such threats scarcely matters. In his tweets, he asked, “What good is NATO” if Germany was paying Russia for gas? Why should the United States pay billions to “subsidize Europe” while it was losing “Big on Trade”? Those comments were not aimed at Europe. They were designed to discredit the alliance in the eyes of his faithful throng back home.
But even Trump must know the likely response in Europe. The insults and humiliations he inflicted on allied leaders will not be forgotten or forgiven. They will make it impossible for European leaders to win public support for the spending Trump disingenuously claims to want. What German leader after such a tongue-lashing could do Trump’s bidding and hope to survive politically?
Any student of history knows that it is moments like this summit that set in motion chains of events that are difficult to stop. The democratic alliance that has been the bedrock of the American-led liberal world order is unraveling. At some point, and probably sooner than we expect, the global peace that that alliance and that order undergirded will unravel, too. Despite our human desire to hope for the best, things will not be okay. The world crisis is upon us.
Welcome to the UK, Mr President on 18:20 - Jul 16 by perplex
Why Shaky why, you are totally bonkers you poor soul.
[Post edited 16 Jul 2018 18:21]
At the end of the day I am a bleeding heart liberal, and much as I'd like to see you continue to make a fool of yourself I will let you into a little secret that everybody on this message board - evidently apart from you - knows:
CTRL A: Mark all text on a browser page
CTRL C: Copy it to the clipboard
CTRL V: Paste it into some sort of other page or application like an editor
If you want to know what CTRL means, that is going to cost you big bucks, however.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
