|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted January 31, 2017 06:42 PM |
|
|
Making the old masters pay for your drink... well-played, sir.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2017 06:54 PM |
|
|
|
Regarding New York Times. It's rigged beyond belief. All that their so-called journalists can do is to criticize. They even don't pretend to be objective anymore.
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted January 31, 2017 07:58 PM |
|
|
artu said:
Making the old masters pay for your drink... well-played, sir.
I accepted that third and final drink, another Watney's Red I believe but I did not let him pay for the first two. Actually the dude had not said a word to me before, not one of welcome, nothing, so I was a tad taken-back by him when he calmly said what he did. I drank that ale and watched him leave the spotted-cow and for a minute or two wondered what the hell had just happened? I wasn't the wise old sage back then. 
|
|
tSar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted January 31, 2017 08:26 PM |
|
|
I just signed the petition to prevent Donald Trump from making a state visit to the UK. 1.7million signatures so far, but parliament will take no action. Hopefully this is the genius of Trump at work (I do believe he's an incredibly intelligent person, no doubt he has memorized Sun Tzu's art of warfare his application of its principles is evident) in order to show us just how little our governments care about our actual values, viva world revolution. This is nothing personal against Trump, but I am an ardent believer in freedom and justice, whoever transgresses will be reprimanded, for now this act will serve as a starter. A policy that punishes and deprives the freedom of whole minorities out of irrational fear is no justice.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 31, 2017 10:19 PM |
|
|
Galaad said:
Quote:
OF COURSE everyone with a brain is against him - not necessarily against him personally, but against what HE DOES and what kind of a government is taking shape.
Funny how quick it is to say people "with a brain" are against him, so the people "with a brain" support warmongers who already have multiple mass murder on their records LMAO
yeah, no snow, man. jj, i have no idea how you could be so one-sided yourself. hillary was just another turd in the punchbowl-toilet of the running organization that was continuing their heavy-handed involvement into what was making everything across the world so goddamn snowty.
trump, on the other hand, is trying a new kind of snowty. we'll see if it works. i'm not hopeful(when am i EVER, right? ), but we'll see.
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted January 31, 2017 10:50 PM |
|
|
fred79 said:
(when am i EVER, right?), but we'll see.
Could be the quote of a confederalist lol
Admit it, you live in South Carolina and own a great muffin planting.
Sorry for off topic.
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 31, 2017 11:17 PM |
|
|
tSar-Ivor said:
A policy that punishes and deprives the freedom of whole minorities out of irrational fear is no justice.
Trump deprives nobody of his freedom, circulating in and out the United States is a privilege, not a right, this is called an immigration rule. When I was 18, France didn't want Romanians in (or any from east, visas were refused in every situation), and I didn't whine. I took it the hard way, got to Italy, got a job there then used my resident card to pass in France and apply for studies.
Then which minority? The most populated muslim countries are not on the list, the list is actually the list made by Obama, about the most hostile countries toward US. Which explains why the term of "irrational fear" doesn't make much sense there.
About "serious" medias: such medias lied all the time about Trump, about Brexit, about Frexit, about immigration, about racism, they created all those problems. Take for example this ban, did those medias inform you that America backs Trump decision by 48 to 42? And they call it a chaos? No, is simply a president applying what a majority of people want from him. Democracy.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
tSar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted January 31, 2017 11:29 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Then which minority? The most populated muslim countries are not on the list, the list is actually the list made by Obama, about the most hostile countries toward US. Which explains why the term of "irrational fear" doesn't make much sense there.
The irrational fear stems from the propaganda that terrorism is somehow a legitimate threat to warrant such measures, just because we've been told that these countries are a threat and that terrorism is a threat don't make it so, and it is not justice to judge a whole country and its people on the actions of the few within them (the US can look at its own sordid past and see that she has wrought more terror in the world than anyone else), not only that it's a violation of Human Rights and un-Constitutional, to be denied entry solely on this reasoning. That's if you buy into the whole "war on terror" propaganda you still need to have due process for every individual, stereotyping Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen as evil and everyone from there as a potential threat is asinine. Need only look at yourself and your own past experiences to know that one human being ain't anything like another, so painting a whole country as some mind hive and then try to argue that case must then make one look pretty daft indeed.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 31, 2017 11:45 PM |
|
|
tSar-Ivor said:
Terrorism is not a legitimate threat to warrant such measures, just because we've been told that these countries are a threat
For me it is, which boils down to each one appreciation, and thats why people with similar appreciations unite and vote for someone to represent their wishes. I know that the European habits are to deny the danger then light some candies and pray when bodies are torn ans atrociously mutilated, but there is actually a way to do all possible to prevent the inevitable outcome: what about stop importing terrorists?
Then UK wants to ban Trump but has no problems with the majority of Americans supporting his immigration policies? What kind of logic is this?
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 12:01 AM |
|
|
Yeah, importing terrorists... That's real.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 12:07 AM |
|
|
This makes non sense to use statistics for terrorism, which is only starting and developing while we (not me, surely) welcome it with open arms. Is like saying "I will bring a homeless guy in my house and let him with my daughter because there is no statistic about homeless raping my daughter in my house". Very smart.
What you fail to comprehend is that the POLICY about immigration doesn't explain if there will be any limit, until then, who exactly comes in, how are they controlled, who exactly will be expelled later and so on. Its just "let anybody enter, and if you are against you are a fascist". Should I recall that the Tunisian terrorist in Germany was denied asylum in June then he wasn't expelled, as the law requires; and now go and brag your statistics to the family of those he killed.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 12:19 AM |
|
|
How is banning people from 7 countries completly, a legitimate alternative to "let anybody in without background check" in your book, Sal? What if they have on-going businesss there, what if they have a sick relative on death bed?
You talk about numbers when they support you only and when they don't, it's suddenly statistical noise somehow and it's about mourning family members. I wonder though, why isnt Trump so sensitive to lost lives when it comes to gun-violence, you know, the victims of that being around 5000 times more compared to victims of immigrants attacks and so on...
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 12:25 AM |
|
|
|
No, its not statistical noise, because you use off topic statistics. Trump immigration ban is based on current terrorist attacks in Europe, not in USA. It helps to read proper facts and now put the correct number of 170 (+ hundreds of injured) to "killed by jihadist" and look at your statistics again, that will resume the situation.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 12:40 AM |
|
|
as far as the statistics there go, artu, i'd hope you would remember, that 9/11 was an attack that took out over 2,000 people. that is enough to cover the 10 years that they plan their next attack(which is just one of a myraid of reasons why you haven't seen much activity by them lately).
this is supposing, of course, that it was terrorists in the first place, and/or also supposing that if it WAS, that they weren't just ALLOWED to attack for the oil-invasion agenda.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 12:55 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 00:57, 01 Feb 2017.
|
@fred
Those were not legal or illegal immigrants, they hijacked planes. And they were from Saudi Arabia, your "ally," remember.
@Sal
How is it an off topic statistic when the topic is exactly the "assumed" threat of immigrants killing people? Can an immigrant go blow a truck full of C4 in the future, killing hundreds, yes, can a U.S. citizen also do that, yes, can somebody from some local cult do that, yes, can somebody from Denmark with ISIS ties do that, yes... Nothing suggests that immigrants from Yemen or Iran are more likely to do that. You fear one, more than the other, yet, the statistics suggest you have no solid ground to do that, unless you have one of those crystal balls that you constantly accuse people of holding.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 12:58 AM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 01:02, 01 Feb 2017.
|
we don't have allies here in the states, artu. just people that the snows in power haven't snowed over yet, thus creating more terrorists and other nefarious wicked enemies.
heywaitaminute. are you suggesting that they flew those planes from saudi arabia?
and, i was under the impression that they were from afghanistan, not saudi arabia(maybe one, but the rest of them were[or were trained by] al-qaeda(sp) in afghanistan)? 
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 01:12 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 01:12, 01 Feb 2017.
|
Of the 19, 15 were from Saudi Arabia and none of them were from Afghanistan. Al Qaeda has cells in many places, they are not a "national" organization. Link
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 03:06 AM |
|
|
|
so why did they have us invade afghanistan, again? for the heroin, right?
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 09:35 AM |
|
|
artu, what is done there is called prevention. Holland and Merkel produce dead people and angry people -millions of them, Trump is willing to avoid the madness they did. It does not matter if it will work or not, but the intention of protecting your people, which disappeared from our leaders language and concerns. And don't forget that it is a 3 months moratorium, only until they find proper way for handling it better. Funny how everyone forgot how Isis themselves warned us that they are going to infiltrate immigration and refugees.
Look, again, I am NOT against immigration and help the refugees, but the way we, in Europe, do it RIGHT now, is foolish. A political act with such serious consequences, should expose and have its own precise rules, present its economic limits, have an intelligent and realistic plan then stick to it. We have no plan, is "look at this pic of a dead child, be generous then shut up" while there are 250 millions willing to come. Add this on the top of 30 years of heavy uncontrolled immigration notably from Africa, which leaded to partitioning of territory, insecurity and certainly soon, civil war until people recover their identity and sovereignty. In this context, don't expect me to criticize when a leader stands against such immigration, this is what (and much more) I would want our leaders to do, too.
But I also am a democrat, and I will not go on breaking everything, aggress, insult and threat others, be a crybaby like Trump protesters all over the world, because the election did not go my way. With the heavy corruptions stories the right party have to deal right now in France, there are serious chances we go another socialist lunacy for next 5 years, and thats it.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 01, 2017 11:48 AM |
|
|
A couple of deluded people produced a couple of dead that are meaningless in the bigger picture, but some people with their own agenda make a big deal out of it.
However, this is the US thread, not the Europe thread, and the main problem with the executive order is first and foremost a technical one: it's shoddily done, obviously unbeknownst to mostmembers of the future government, so shoddily in fact, that the AAG wouldn't enact it, that judges stopped it in parts.
The CONTENT of the executive order in question is a completely different matter and is quite obviously debatable, so debatable, in fact, that it will be sued against. Meanwhile, the state of Washington will be joined by Mas, NY and Vir. There is no telling, how many states will follow.
The problem with Trump and Clinton is, that the people of the US are shooting themselves in the foot: Neither Clinton nor Trump are acceptable? Well, then vote for one of the two other candidates. In this election, things were so easily identifiable, you could think it was a test run made under the general question, let's see how strong our two-party system really is: take the most unpopular career politician there is on one hand, then put the most unlikable, incompetent bag of hot air on the other. Nominate their mirror images, except a lot more likable, reasonable and a lot less cynical and see what happens, and what happened was, that the two big parties can have the crappiest nominees, one of them will still make it.
It's the Americans who aren't thinking outside the box here.
This is different in Europe. In Germany, the immigration issue alone has given rise to a new party (in 2013) that has gathered 15% of the votes in all 3 2016 elections. We have presidential elections this year, and the new party will enter parliament, making sure that the issue will be on the agenda. While it's pressure from the wrong side, since that issue could (have) be(en) handled better, it will make sure that things will be looked at and changed.
Generally spoken, politics are bound to disappoint the voters and the people. As inspiring and likable and hope-infusing a candidate and as good their intentions may be, real politics will always be an uphill battle; the inertia of the powers that are is quite big, and it would be foolish to think they would just let things run their course.
In reality you will always end up picking the seemingly smallest evil.
Gambling on Trump might be worth the experiment when the country in question was, say, Belgium. In the US of A, though? Voting Trump in a country where a sizable part of the population think that Obama, who Europeans would put quite some way right of the middle of the political spectrum, was a leftist, means that the country will take a turn to the ultra-right.
He lost no time nominating Judge Gorsuch for the vacant supreme court seat, and this will obviously send the US back on a firm pro-life course at the very least, should he be accepted.
On the other hand, it was to be expected that the winner of the election would tilt the Suprme Court in their favor, sonsidering that there are a couple of over-80s as well. With a view on that, it was clear that it would be something of a water-shed election.
The US will get a lot more than they bargained for with the Trump "gamble".
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
