View Full Version : US Politics Thread 2016-2020
So... Trump's masterplan to get Mexico pay for the wall is a 20% tax on products from Mexico.
Erm... what happens if the companies just decide to raise their prices +20%? :88)
So... Trump's masterplan to get Mexico pay for the wall is a 20% tax on products from Mexico.
Erm... what happens if the companies just decide to raise their prices +20%? :88)
Mexican produced goods become more expensive?
Bilge_Rat
01-27-17, 09:02 AM
Trump's approval rating is now at 59%:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history
Bilge_Rat
01-27-17, 09:06 AM
So... Trump's masterplan to get Mexico pay for the wall is a 20% tax on products from Mexico.
Erm... what happens if the companies just decide to raise their prices +20%? :88)
well actually that is the GOP plan, most countries already have a tax on imports. Canada is part of NAFTA, but U.S. goods are still subject to a 13-15% import tax (i.e. GST/HST).
Doesn't Finland have a 24% VAT on imported goods? :ping:
AVGWarhawk
01-27-17, 10:11 AM
So... Trump's masterplan to get Mexico pay for the wall is a 20% tax on products from Mexico.
Erm... what happens if the companies just decide to raise their prices +20%? :88)
That is what will happen in part. The US citizen pays for it. Trump backed up this assertion on the 20%. Either way, the border needs to be secured.
At the end of the day Trump was looking to raise tariff for goods out of Mexico to the US. This maneuver to stop US companies from going to Mexico and building factories.
AVGWarhawk
01-27-17, 10:13 AM
Mexican produced goods become more expensive?
Yes, to cover the 20% tariff. Where else would it come from?
Is that viewed as an issue in the US?
Because if something like this does happen in Russia, in addition to the control by the state and the public (which may be imperfect in our society), we get all those US funded political activists who would flock to such election violation cases (including the ones they make up to justify their existance but that is another matter entirely).
It's only an issue when people are trying to make political points, Jill Stein's recount requests are a case in point. Or Al Gore's back in 2000.
Voter fraud on a scale to effect a national election just isn't currently feasible.
ikalugin
01-27-17, 10:14 AM
Meanwhile in Russia Sergei Mikhailov, the second-highest-ranking officer in the cyber-intelligence unit of the Federal Security Service (FSB), and Ruslan Stoyanov, a private cybersecurity analyst specializing in antivirus programs—were arrested on charges of treason.
Makes you ponder...
Stoyanov's AntiVirus software might have found their own russian sniffing software and botnets, so... :03:
Regarding Mikhailov maybe he becomes the scapegoat for influencing the US elections if such action is being found out; Putin of course has nothing to do with it. He's such a good friend of Trump, and threatened with the third world war would Hillary have been elected (if anyone remembers that).
The classical clichés do not work anymore, America's new Right is now pro Russian, while Obama and Hillary are not. May and Merkel are also anti-russian; May because fearing european trade could shift away from the UK to the east, and Merkel has not yet caught wind of the US government mind change.
What will they think of next...
Nah, it was an internal thing, this arrest is a part of investigation of a hacker group that was hacking internal political stuff, like Medvedev's twitter and leaking various stuff.
Lately it went comercial (ie selling secrets for money rather than leaking them for political reasons) and this may be why they got screwed. You can access their twitter here:
https://twitter.com/b0ltai
AVGWarhawk
01-27-17, 10:15 AM
Trump's approval rating is now at 59%:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history
Interesting! Thanks for posting BR!
ikalugin
01-27-17, 10:18 AM
Voter fraud on a scale to effect a national election just isn't currently feasible.
Why? The system appears to be vulnerable.
AVGWarhawk
01-27-17, 10:25 AM
If the voting systems are separate for each state, what precludes you picking up voters from one state and them moving them to vote to another and as such make them vote twice?
The systems would need to be designed to not allow moving votes electronically. Standardize the voting machines for each state. These machines are coded for the state and not connected to other states. Each machine will have a second code for individual counties within the state. Again, each machine for each county are not connected.
***Keep the Russian out of them***:har:
ikalugin
01-27-17, 10:33 AM
The systems would need to be designed to not allow moving votes electronically. Standardize the voting machines for each state. These machines are coded for the state and not connected to other states. Each machine will have a second code for individual counties within the state. Again, each machine for each county are not connected.
***Keep the Russian out of them***:har:
Sorry, I fail to understand your point. What are you trying to say?
AVGWarhawk
01-27-17, 10:40 AM
Sorry, I fail to understand your point. What are you trying to say?
You inquired about moving votes from state to state. What would prevent that? Each state has their own machines that are coded for that state only.
mookiemookie
01-27-17, 10:45 AM
So... Trump's masterplan to get Mexico pay for the wall is a 20% tax on products from Mexico.
Erm... what happens if the companies just decide to raise their prices +20%? :88)
The American consumer gets screwed, businesses don't move back to the States, and the fact that tariffs are bad for business is proven yet again as it has been over and over and over in history.
http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2016/03/11/import-tariffs-bad-will-cost-money./
Mr Quatro
01-27-17, 10:57 AM
The American consumer gets screwed, businesses don't move back to the States, and the fact that tariffs are bad for business is proven yet again as it has been over and over and over in history.
http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2016/03/11/import-tariffs-bad-will-cost-money./
Were already getting screwed ... our own cars and trucks coming cross the border on semi's with car trailers to sell in America.
I'll be glad to pay more for the beer and avocados too.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/01/26/americans-may-pay-more-beer-snacks-and-cars-build-border-wall/97108358/?utm_source=huffingtonpost.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=pubexchange
Mexico sent $295 billion worth of goods across the U.S. border in 2015, the office of the Trade Representative says. Overall, U.S. imports from its southern neighbor peaked at $316.4 billion that year. That's in contrast to Mexican-bound exports from the U.S. that amounted to $267.2 billion.
The biggest import is cars, with the U.S. spending $74 billion in 2015 for the hundreds of thousands of Chevrolet and Ram trucks, as well as Volkswagens, Fords, Hondas, Nissans and other brands that are assembled in Mexican factories.
ikalugin
01-27-17, 11:13 AM
You inquired about moving votes from state to state. What would prevent that? Each state has their own machines that are coded for that state only.
How does this preclude a person voting in one state, then moving and voting in another?
Nah, it was an internal thing, this arrest is a part of investigation of a hacker group that was hacking internal political stuff, like Medvedev's twitter and leaking various stuff.
Lately it went comercial (ie selling secrets for money rather than leaking them for political reasons) and this may be why they got screwed. You can access their twitter here:
https://twitter.com/b0ltai
Ah, the Humpty Dumpties, got to admit not heard of them, they've kinda of gotten over-shadowed by the Fancy Bears. :yep:
How is old Preved! Medved these days? Haven't seen much of him since he and Putin had a disagreement of policy back when he was still President.
AVGWarhawk
01-27-17, 12:09 PM
How does this preclude a person voting in one state, then moving and voting in another?
If a individual is registered in one state and moves that individual will need to register for that state. It goes a bit deeper than that. Each individual not only registers in the state but also the county within that state.
ikalugin
01-27-17, 12:16 PM
Ah, the Humpty Dumpties, got to admit not heard of them, they've kinda of gotten over-shadowed by the Fancy Bears. :yep:
How is old Preved! Medved these days? Haven't seen much of him since he and Putin had a disagreement of policy back when he was still President.
He is the head of the Goverment, the PM. But yea, it is an internal thing, not related to the US elections. From what I read the FSB officer in question was arrested during the FSB leadership meeting.
If a individual is registered in one state and moves that individual will need to register for that state. It goes a bit deeper than that. Each individual not only registers in the state but also the county within that state.
What precludes an individual to register in multiple states? Do states check that said individual is not registered elsewhere?
How does this preclude a person voting in one state, then moving and voting in another?
Well i'd think that having to vote, then move, re-register in the new location and then vote again all during the month or two long (less depending on the state) early voting period for one thing, minimum residency and registration deadline requirements in some states for another. Remember they can't use fake addresses either. It has to be a real location within the town or city they would be moving to.
They might even have to prevent anyone else from registering at their old address to prevent any raised flags.
AVGWarhawk
01-27-17, 12:21 PM
What precludes an individual to register in multiple states? Do states check that said individual is not registered elsewhere?
Nothing precludes an individual from multiple registrations from state to state. However, when voting(at least for me) I had to provide my current address before I could vote. But, this is not always a failsafe either. Anyone could provide my name and address. I was never asked for ID. That is a problem.
mookiemookie
01-27-17, 12:46 PM
Were already getting screwed ... our own cars and trucks coming cross the border on semi's with car trailers to sell in America.
I'll be glad to pay more for the beer and avocados too.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/01/26/americans-may-pay-more-beer-snacks-and-cars-build-border-wall/97108358/?utm_source=huffingtonpost.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=pubexchange
Paging Mssrs Smoot and Hawley.
Catfish
01-27-17, 01:20 PM
Gorbachov about international relations, from yesterday:
http://time.com/4645442/gorbachev-putin-trump/
Why? The system appears to be vulnerable.
As someone else said, the only place the system is vulnerable to widespread fraud is in the counting/changing of the ballots after votes have been cast.
I came across the following that might explain the difficulty of perpetuating voter fraud on a national level.
In most countries the national government oversees elections and may even have a wing of government charged with this duty. In the U.S. this is not the case at all, not even for Federal elections. This is one of the unsung parts of "States Rights" and exemplifies our national motto of E pluribus unum (out of many, one) that is a pretty interesting part of how the U.S. government is set up. Oversight of elections is charged to the local or county level here, with ultimate oversight by each State's Secretary of State.
Here is something I don't understand or why no one does it.
It seems like every media and anti-Trump people are angry on the President and those who support him on the Mexican wall thing.
How come no one have taken a look at Mexico ? Why haven't any of these people asked the leaders in Mexico what they have in mind to prevent thousand and thousands of poor Mexican people to flee to the States and if it wasn't about time they "installed" a social safety net or similar.
Markus
ikalugin
01-27-17, 02:56 PM
Well i'd think that having to vote, then move, re-register in the new location and then vote again all during the month or two long (less depending on the state) early voting period for one thing, minimum residency and registration deadline requirements in some states for another. Remember they can't use fake addresses either. It has to be a real location within the town or city they would be moving to.
They might even have to prevent anyone else from registering at their old address to prevent any raised flags.
Nothing precludes an individual from multiple registrations from state to state. However, when voting(at least for me) I had to provide my current address before I could vote. But, this is not always a failsafe either. Anyone could provide my name and address. I was never asked for ID. That is a problem.
The problem here is not with individual fraudilent votes, but with the potential organised mass fraudilent votes. Ie some organisation bussing people around so to speak.
As someone else said, the only place the system is vulnerable to widespread fraud is in the counting/changing of the ballots after votes have been cast.
I came across the following that might explain the difficulty of perpetuating voter fraud on a national level.
That is where the system appears to be the most resistant to fraud, as you cannot subvert a single entity. With the multiple votes this does not improve the resistance of the system, but decreases it.
Catfish
01-27-17, 03:07 PM
[...] How come no one have taken a look at Mexico ? Why haven't any of these people asked the leaders in Mexico what they have in mind to prevent thousand and thousands of poor Mexican people to flee to the States and if it wasn't about time they "installed" a social safety net or similar. Markus
The leaders in Mexico are rather powerless when it comes to citizens deciding to leave their country, for whatever reason. Well paid jobs are rare.
A good idea would be to change Mexico in a way that not so much people see the need to leave, but this is difficult. Mexico is ruled by drug syndicates, and they do not only kill each other, but also citizens indiscriminately, just to spread terror and demonstrate their power.
(Excempt some short intervals where there is an uneasy "peace" between syndicates, but since the Zetas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Zetas) appeared on the scene it all has turned to the worse.)
Other targets are journalists, politicians and generally everyone who publicly dares to criticize the cartels.
The problem on the US side is that so many guys over there consider consuming drugs as being cool. And of course some US citizens are making big money with it, not only the Mafia. And the drugs pass the border via official routes and border crossings, since a lot of border personnell is either bribed, or directly threatened, or dead. They do not need to illegally cross the border, most of the van drivers do not know eactly what they transport, and have official papers from all sides. The CIA itself has allegedly dealt with mexican drugs to finance the Contras in Nicaragua back then.
The drugs passing the borders via official border crossings and openly, is one of the main reasons Mr. Trumps wall will most probably be a failure when it comes to drug trafficking.
Regarding illegal immigrants, a lot of them help to power the US industry, since they get very few money, and are thus cheap workers and silently accepted for all kinds of jobs. So some industries will probably not like Trump's plans. Trump used mexican workers for his own business b.t.w.
The third thing is international companies, who do not need a home country anymore. Their registered office can be in Monrovia, or Singapore. And if a country decides to threaten them with higher taxes, they just change the country.
Silicone valley CEOs probably tend more to keep their head offices in the US, even if they produce in India, or China. But make no mistake, patriotism stops where money is involved.
AndyJWest
01-27-17, 03:15 PM
Here is something I don't understand or why no one does it.
It seems like every media and anti-Trump people are angry on the President and those who support him on the Mexican wall thing.
How come no one have taken a look at Mexico ? Why haven't any of these people asked the leaders in Mexico what they have in mind to prevent thousand and thousands of poor Mexican people to flee to the States and if it wasn't about time they "installed" a social safety net or similar.
Markus
They aren't 'fleeing' to the U.S. They move there for simple economic reasons, in the same way that anyone else does. People moving around in order to maximise economic benefit is integral to the economic system. There are of course alternatives ('planned economies' where such movement is restricted), but neither the U.S. nor Mexico are trying to impose such systems. As for social safety nets, they require funding.
AVGWarhawk
01-27-17, 03:27 PM
The American consumer gets screwed, businesses don't move back to the States, and the fact that tariffs are bad for business is proven yet again as it has been over and over and over in history.
http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2016/03/11/import-tariffs-bad-will-cost-money./
Business my not move back to the US but it may prevent any working towards leaving the US to Mexico. In some cases it may be more profitable to restart manufacturing back in the US as the tariff of 20% does cost more.
At this juncture....at least Trump is attempting to do something other than signing off on TPP and allowing other manufacturing jobs go elsewhere.
Platapus
01-27-17, 05:19 PM
How does this preclude a person voting in one state, then moving and voting in another?
Because there are deadlines for registering prior to a specific election. Registration must be completed prior to any early or absentee voting.
Therefore, I can't register to vote in Maryland, cast an early or absentee vote, then travel to Virginia, register and cast a vote in the same election as registration in Virginia will close prior to voting starting in Maryland.
There are limitations on when a specific state can start early voting, just for this reason.
The problem is being registered simultaneously in two states.
In the past, it was expected for a citizen to have one primary residence. People could have residency in multiple states, but one was designated as primary due to the amount of time spent in that state. For many many years, this worked out well.
However, as citizens become more mobile and fluid in where they live, it is possible for a citizen to have more than one residence but not have any of them as a primary residence.
Various states have tried adopting different policies to address this. One of the more common ones focuses on where does the person live at the time of the election (usually in November). That works great if the citizen has a regular rotating schedule of residences e.g., Summers in New York and Winters in Florida). But what if the citizens rotation of residences changes or is unpredictable? That's a problem.
While a lot of people like to have systems with iron clad verification, they forget that a lot of what happens in our society is based on an assumption that the citizen will do the right thing until proven that they have done the wrong thing. A lot of our voting procedures is based on trusting the citizen to do the right thing. Implementing a system where the government provides 100% oversight would be expensive and unnecessary in my opinion.
Our federal elections are inherently safer (not 100%) because of not only do we have a lot of voters, but the voting is decentralized.
Yes, if I were willing to risk committing a felony, I could manage to vote twice, but my voting twice in a federal election will not have much of an effect on the outcome as we have tens of millions of votes. Would any of you risk being charged with a Felony knowing that your crime won't affect the outcome of an election? I suspect few would.
Our decentralization provides another level of security. There is little that anyone can do at the state level to effect the outcome of an election. Fraud would have to occur at the precinct level. There are almost a hundred precincts just in my county just in my state. How many precincts across the country would have to be successfully infiltrated to have an effect on the outcome of the election?
Lets try to affect the outcome of federal elections in my county. First you would have to determine which precincts are expected not to favour the Purple Party. After all, you don't want to risk exposure fixing precincts where you already know you will get the Purple Party vote. Let's say that there are 40 precincts that need fixin. Let's say that each precinct has an average of 5,000 registered voters. Out of a two party race that means that you want to fix between 30-40% of the vote as you can assume that some of the citizens will vote Purple. So you need to fraudulently alter 1,700 votes in each precinct. 40 precincts mean 68,000 fraudulent votes.
And that's just for my one county. A single county does not sway a federal election. In many cases, a single county won't sway a state's electoral college.
But, wouldn't it be easier to just after the votes at the state level (there are only 50 of them. Well no. Part of the decentralization of our voting process is that at the precinct level is where the initial ballot counts are made, witnessed, recorded, reported, and sealed.
All this information is public information. Last election, I published my precincts results 12 minutes after the polls closed and those results were published on the internet in real time. If my precinct legitimately receives 500 votes for the Purple Party but the state reports that my precinct reported 5,000 votes for the Purple Party, it will be immediately detected by either party observers or the citizenry. Since the ballots are sealed in a box (one more reason why paper ballots are the best), this box can be unsealed in the presence of witnesses and the ballots recounted. Any discrepancy will be obvious and impossible to hide as the recounts are open to public witnessing in addition to multiple of state/county/federal witnesses.
Even as a Precinct Chief, I can't do anything alone and everything I do is checked and double checked and recorded. Even if I wanted to compromise the election at my precinct there is little I could do, unless the majority of my election officers are in on the conspiracy. This is why election officers are assigned according to their declared political party and why the Chief and Assistant Chief are from different declared parties. The penalties for election officers violating election law are much harsher then for a citizen fraudulently voting and they should be.
All that being written, it is important to remember that elections are run by humans and humans are prone to mistakes. The news media is eager to publish stories where people have voted more than once, but tend not to follow up the story when the investigation by the State Board of Elections reveals that it was due to a mistake by a human.
Mistakes should not happen, and we try very hard to prevent mistakes, but it is important to not attribute to a conspiracy what is actually attributed to a human mistake.
As we are moving more towards computer assisted voter check-in I have found that our mistakes (which were always in the decimal single digit percentage) have gotten lower and in many cases eliminated. Virginia is a leading state in investments into new computer assisted voter check-ins and it is paying off. I hope that more states start taking advantage of the innovation that Virginia is paying for.
Computers are very good at detecting details and humans are very good at solving problems. Working together, where each does what it does best, results in a more accurate voter check-in.
But there is still a lot of work that needs to be done. Closer coordination between state agencies that handle death records and the election registrar's office is needed. When a person dies, that information should either automatically update multiple databases, or send an alert to those who maintain those databases.
But honestly, the biggest problem are people moving and not letting the registrar's office know. I turn away more citizens away from the polling location because of this than for any other reason. It is part of my job that stynks the most. But ultimately, it is the citizens responsibility to update their own record. But knowing that does not make it easier when you have a citizen crying in front of you, when you have just told them that they can't vote for the president of their own country.
This is why we have provisional ballots. A provisional ballot allows the person to cast a sealed ballot and then have their eligibility determined after the polls close. If the research indicates that they are eligible, their ballot is unsealed and counted. If they are ineligible, their sealed ballot is destroyed unopened. The person casting the provisional ballot is allowed to be present during the investigation.
Another problem is the fickleness of the citizens. On one hand the citizens want a voting system that verifies everyone's data, but on the other hand these same citizens resist any talk of integrated inter-state/federal databases. It is difficult to have it both ways. That's one of the many reasons I like voter ID laws. To me, it is a good compromise between allowing anyone to vote if they claim they can vote and having a comprehensive national or inter-state database of our personal information.
It is an imperfect system, run by imperfect human election officers, processing imperfect human voters.
Even of our systems are 99.99999% secure, that still leaves a number of voters that will slip through the cracks.
I can design a system that will have a zero percent chance of voter fraud. Unfortunately it would take each citizen about 8 hours to be processed and the entire system would cost trillions of dollars.
How much money are we willing to spend to get from 99.99999% to 99.999999%?
Many of the policies are a compromise like many other instances in our government.
If some one has a better system, please contact your respective State Board of Elections and submit it. So far, our present system is about as secure and fair as it can get.... with some room for improvements.
A rather long winded response. But you asked a serious question and I felt it deserved a serious answer. If you have any other question about how USA elections are run. I will be happy to answer them or research it and get back to you.
Platapus
01-27-17, 05:22 PM
Low tech is often the best tech, but what will we do about all those voter wannabees who would just ink their own fingers?...
<O>
They they ink their own fingers before casting their ballot, they would not be allowed to vote (or would probably be able to cast a provisional ballot).
It would not make sense to pre-ink your own fingers if you intended to vote.
Platapus
01-27-17, 05:43 PM
Well, do you think that the following would work:
- each state has a separate, state run database. Ie the federal goverment doesnt access it.
It would be possible for the individual states to share their data without involving the federal government.
- registration for the voting (I assume that it happens before the vote?) is done using proof of citizenship (birth certificate + social security number?). Ie you can sell it that you need to have right to vote in order to vote. Registration is linked to the state's photo ID or other means of ID (for example biometrics) supplied by the person.
Registration for voting is something that is confusing to a lot of people. The information given to the registrar is only one part of the information that is involved in determining the eligibility of a voter. This is why it takes weeks to process registrations properly and why there are deadlines where citizens must request registration well in advance of the election. I am adamantly against any proposed "same day registration" as it simple does not give the registrar enough time to check the various databases.
- after registration and before the elections states run the check to verify that there are no double registrations.
Yes, this is supposed to be done, but while everyone expresses concern about elections, legislators are reluctant to allocate funds so that registrars are fully staffed and have the necessary tools. We care about elections but don't care enough to spend money fixing the system. :doh:
We are still a confederation of independent states and unfortunately that means that there are few laws the govern how states run elections other than the laws enacted in that state. We have states that have photo ID laws, other states that have non-photo ID laws and states that have no ID laws. As a precinct chief, I am in favour of photo ID laws as long as the state makes it easy and affordable for citizens to get the necessary ID in time for the election. In Virginia, it is possible to get a photo ID issued after the election if the citizen does not have a photo ID on election day. That's making it as easy as they can. :up:
[quote] What would be the expected counter arguments to such a set up?
Counter arguments can be financial. enacting more stringent voting procedures has a cost and that cost must be ultimately born by the citizens. Many states simply don't think that their individual way of running elections has any problems and it ain't broke, don't spend money you don't have fixing it.
A lot of these problems can be solved by having a National ID card, but that is a touchy topic with many citizens. We came up with a compromise in the REAL ID ACT where the federal government mandated what consists a good ID card but left the implementation up to the states. That way it is not a National ID card but a State ID card that adheres to national standards. A good compromise but it also mandated that the states (meaning the citizens) pay for this. Several states balk at this and want the maintain control over the ID but want the federal government (meaning citizens from other states) to fund it and we are at an impass
There are always claims that photo ID laws discriminate against certain types of citizens and can lead to disenfranchisement. I have honestly not seen a logical supported argument that supports that.
We are in the 21st century. It is getting more and more difficult to operate in our society without Photo ID. You can't open up a bank account without it, you can't cash a check without it, you can't get on a commercial airliner without it. In many states you can't see your doctor without it.
For those low percentage of citizens that truly don't have a photo ID, then the citizen should be allowed to obtain one easily and inexpensively (or free).
ikalugin
01-27-17, 05:48 PM
Thanks for a detailed and constructive repply!
While a lot of people like to have systems with iron clad verification, they forget that a lot of what happens in our society is based on an assumption that the citizen will do the right thing until proven that they have done the wrong thing.True, one is not guilty untill proven to be so. However you need instruments to detect the indicators of the crime being commited in order to investigate it.
Yes, if I were willing to risk committing a felony, I could manage to vote twice, but my voting twice in a federal election will not have much of an effect on the outcome as we have tens of millions of votes. Would any of you risk being charged with a Felony knowing that your crime won't affect the outcome of an election? I suspect few would. It is true that individual double votes won't change the outcome, the problem that I see is that the system appears to be vulnerable to organised fraud. Ie an organised group of people registering to vote in multiple areas and then casting multiple votes.
While this may not end in a land slide victory, this may well tip the scales.
Lets try to affect the outcome of federal elections in my county.That is where the criminal (entity) would min max, by fixing the votes that are tied. They would get the maximum effect out of the minimal effort. Depending on the predictive power of your model the actual fraud can be kept to minimum.
The other way to maximise the effects is to move the group of people between as many voting areas as possible (within the physical constraint ofc)
p.s. the reason why I discuss this is because from what I know, the accusations of voting fraud in Russia tend to come from the multiple voting or people not eligible to vote voting. As as pro-democracy person (strange as that may appear) I think that the voters should be concerned about how they vote and try to minimise the effects of the fraud.
While I have great respect for your experience as an organiser of the vote, I am concerned about you possibly not seeing the greater picture due to that same experience.
Platapus
01-27-17, 07:35 PM
It is true that individual double votes won't change the outcome, the problem that I see is that the system appears to be vulnerable to organised fraud. Ie an organised group of people registering to vote in multiple areas and then casting multiple votes.
It would have to be extensively organized which, of course, increases the chances of discovery. To effectively affect the outcome of a federal election you would have to fix many precincts in many counties across the whole country. Incidentally, this is a very good reason not to adopt a popular vote system for President. Out of the more than 3,000 counties in the US, 50% of the population lives in about 200 counties. The warty Electoral College helps spread out the effectiveness of the votes across many counties in the country.
But let's take my precinct. Lets assume that my precinct does not require ID to vote. Using the numbers I already posted, I would need to fraudulently cast about 1,700 votes out of a voting population of 5,000. How am I gonna do that?
If I want to fraudulently vote in place of Mary Smith, then I need to have my fraudulent voter at the polls before Mary Smith votes. It does me no good to have my fraudulent voter arrive at the polls after the legitimate Mary Smith votes as my fraudulent voter won't be allowed to vote and will only call attention to my scheme.
I would need to generate a list of the registered voters in my precinct that would not normally vote for the Purple Party. It would be silly to fraudulently take a vote away from a citizen who intends on voting Purple after all. I would need their names and addresses. I would then need to distribute and assign each of my fraudulent voters one or perhaps two names and addresses of legitimate voters. I don't want two of my fraudulent voters to use the same name. Awkward!
The assignments would have to match sex and aproximate age. I would not be a good choice to impersonate 22 year old Sally Smith when I am an old guy.
So I have my crew of fraudulent voters and their assigned identities. They have to be in line early in the morning because voters in my precinct tend to vote early in the morning on their way to work.
Precincts are simply a collection of neighbourhoods. The election officers in most cases live in those neighbourhoods. So if I am in line trying to impersonate Mike Jones, there is a not insignificant chance that one of the election officers or someone standing in line knows Mike Jones and will challenge me. Even the attempt to fraudulently vote is a felony. Each fraudlent voter can be used only once perhaps twice but the chances of being caught increase greatly the more times one tries to vote, especially when you are trying to vote as early as possible.
And I want to successfully do this 1,700 times. That is not easy.
Let's assume that I am successful and I do arrange fraudulent votes 1,700 times in my precinct and my precinct's results are a win for the Purple Party. That's one precinct out of about 100 just in my county and there are about 100 counties in Virginia.
In my example, I estimated that I need to sway 40 precincts to sway my county to the Purple party. That means that I need 39 other masterminds, each with their own crew of 800-1,700 fraudulent voters. That is about 40,000 people in on the conspiracy just in one state. What is the likelihood of keeping this a secret? And that's for one state. Their are 49 other states in which a federal candidate needs a minimum of 11 states to win and those are very specific states.
So theoretically it may be possible to fraudulently significantly affect a federal election but practically, it is pretty hard.
It would be a whole lot easier if the voting were to take place directly at the state level. But our decentralize precinct based balloting has an intrinsic safety level in that each precinct individually has little effect but must be infiltrated separately.
Ie an organised group of people registering to vote in multiple areas and then casting multiple votes.
The only way that would work would be to get enough people to register in two states (It can't be both in the same state as the state database is shared across the state) and pick two states that will accept dual residences. You would still be faced with assigning these dual residencies to specific precincts so that their double Purple Party vote makes a difference. Again, what's the chances of enough people across many states doing this and not keeping it a secret. Some one is going to film themselves doing this and post it on their facebook site. It might work, which is why I hope we adopt a system where interstate voter registration data can be shared. We are starting to do that with driver's licenses but still have driver's falling through the cracks so we have a lot of work to do.
The size of the voting population in federal elections and the decentralized balloting systems we have makes successfully altering the outcome fraudulently a lot harder than state and local elections where a few hundred votes can make a difference.
As was demonstrated in our last election it is not just the number of votes but the location of those votes that can sway an election.
Like most conspiracy theories, they initially sound feasible but when you start working the details and the numbers, they usually start to fall apart.
Of course even if they don't alter the outcome of an election, fraudulent votes are still wrong and we need to come up with systems that reduce (but probably never eliminate) fraudulent votes.
If you want to affect the election, it is much easier and cost effective to simply have a mud slinging advertisement campaign to discredit the opposing candidate..... which is what happens.... and the press eats it up like ice cream.
I have no idea how elections are run in Russia so I can't opine on how easy or difficult it would be to affect those elections.
Ie an organised group of people registering to vote in multiple areas and then casting multiple votes.
While this may not end in a land slide victory, this may well tip the scales.
I don't agree. You'd need a huge number of operatives to effect the outcome of just about any election. A least in the hundreds but more likely in the thousands. All maintaining legal residences in every one of the 50 states. Valid street addresses mind you. Not made up ones because that list they check off when we walk into the polls is maintained and run by the local authorities who would know what's real and what isn't. Nor could they cluster their registrations to one address as those same local authorities would know there can't be 500 people living in one single family house.
Now assuming that its possible to surmount such a mountainous organizational hurdle they have an even larger logistical hurdle to overcome. They would still need to bus those thousands to the polls where ever they might be needed, even if it is thousands of miles and several time zones away. They must do this relying only on often inaccurate exit polls since official tallies aren't going to be available until it's too late to vote.
Finally like Santa Claus they must do all of this in one night and even then Santa has all night to get his job done whereas the election polls close by 8pm.
Buddahaid
01-27-17, 10:22 PM
I agree. You will likely always be able to prove cases of voter fraud, but never in numbers that would effect any of the elections. This is more smoke to hide u-boat dives.
They they ink their own fingers before casting their ballot, they would not be allowed to vote (or would probably be able to cast a provisional ballot).
It would not make sense to pre-ink your own fingers if you intended to vote.
I meant my post humorously; there was a previous mention of an inked finger as a 'badge of honor', so I just played on the idea of someone inking their finger as sort of 'stolen voter honor'... :)
The fellow being cited by Trump as his source of authority for his claims of not only voter fraud, but of also costing him the election's popular vote is named Gregg Phillips. On the local newsradio station here in Los Angeles (KNX 1070 AM) yesterday, Phillips was interviewed, live and at long length, by one of the reporters who is well known in this area for being very hard and tenacious on interview subjects of all stripes, politically. The reporter just basically blew holes in Phillips' claims and it was amusing to hear Phillips squirm; there has not been a better exhibition of tap dancing since those old MGM musicals. I just wish the reporter had had a database expert along with him since a lot of what Phillips was spouting about his databases and methodology was sheer nonsense...
Gregg Phillips ("with two g's") was similarly upended by Chris Cuomo live on CNN (please excuse the poor quality of the clip, but some of better quality were not complete by a few seconds either at the beginning or the end, and I did not want to give the impression something was being hidden):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBMPScZL4dU
When watching the above clip, it brought to mind the sort of 'proof' Sen. Joe McCarthy and his minions would try to foist off in the 1950s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maLIXQLxvvA
The more things change, the more they remain the same; same swamp - not much different 'gators...
<O>
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3Oujh-UoAASmAe.jpg
Nippelspanner
01-28-17, 06:51 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3Oujh-UoAASmAe.jpg
That's 100% what I tried to express in my last post!
Onkel Neal
01-28-17, 08:16 AM
It's cute & appropriately simplistic.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3Oujh-UoAASmAe.jpg
I don't recall us constitutional moderates/Republicans,, burning cars,, smashing windows,, and beating on people,, it seems that it is mostly done by democrats and the new world order types,, that don't get their way,, we changed the direction by voting out the fascist that didn't have the peoples well being at heart,, that's right I called them fascist because they are a little less evil than communist.. even with all the voter fraud they still couldn't win.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/bombshell-at-least-25-million-dead-and-fraudulent-registered-voters-in-2016.html
Gregg Phillips ("with two g's") was similarly upended by Chris Cuomo live on CNN (please excuse the poor quality of the clip, but some of better quality were not complete by a few seconds either at the beginning or the end, and I did not want to give the impression something was being hidden):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBMPScZL4dUHere's the second interview, didn't go much better for him. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HZZqAsE0bU
Here's the second interview, didn't go much better for him. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HZZqAsE0bU
Sorta like them saying the Russians hacked the election and not showing any proof :hmmm:
The Iraqi translator for the 101st airborne is currently sitting in detention in JFK airport.
GG :yeah:
AndyJWest
01-28-17, 11:34 AM
The Iraqi translator for the 101st airborne is currently sitting in detention in JFK airport.
GG :yeah:
:Kaleun_Applaud:
I saw that, and while I can empathize, I also know one of the fundamental rules when leading, be it men or nations, and that is: There are always casualties.
Platapus
01-28-17, 12:25 PM
The Iraqi translator for the 101st airborne is currently sitting in detention in JFK airport.
GG :yeah:
Not understanding why this is good news.
Schroeder
01-28-17, 12:53 PM
Not understanding why this is good news.
I guess he was sarcastic.:03:
Not understanding why this is good news.
Me neither, but then again, I'm not understanding much of what's coming out of the US at the moment. :yep:
I guess he was sarcastic.:03:
Don't be daft...me...a Brit...being sarcastic?
http://funnypictures1.fjcdn.com/comments/Don+t+make+me+arrest+everyone+here+_752b6f45f7cce0 7f2aa7d9333a78f2c5.jpg
Also the Oscar-nominated film director Asghar Farhadi will not be able to attend the ceremony.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/donald-trump-muslim-ban-oscars-2017-director-asghar-farhadi-iran-the-salesman-a7550751.html
http://media3.giphy.com/media/2xIOiAPXonois/giphy.gif
Also the Oscar-nominated film director Asghar Farhadi will not be able to attend the ceremony.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/donald-trump-muslim-ban-oscars-2017-director-asghar-farhadi-iran-the-salesman-a7550751.html
http://media3.giphy.com/media/2xIOiAPXonois/giphy.gif
That's new to me, according to Danish news media, she is going to boykot the Oscar event due to this step from Trump.
Markus
That's new to me, according to Danish news media, she is going to boykot the Oscar event due to this step from Trump.
Markus
Well, Danish media is wrong on two accounts.
First, it's a he, not a she.
Secondly he's an Iranian national, and therefore is now banned from entering the US.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2017/01/28/oscar-nominated-iranian-director-asghar-farhadi-miss-years-ceremony/
Furthermore, and this is the best bit, even if you're not a citizen of those countries, and just happen to have gone there for a visit? You might get refused too. Valid visa? Green card? Doesn't matter. Denied.
Oh, and of course, those countries who happen to have Trump business interests? Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt...funnily enough, they're not on the list. Who would have thunk it, eh?
Well, Danish media is wrong on two accounts.
First, it's a he, not a she.
Secondly he's an Iranian national, and therefore is now banned from entering the US.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2017/01/28/oscar-nominated-iranian-director-asghar-farhadi-miss-years-ceremony/
Or it could be me who's mixing these two things together.
Now I'm getting a little uncertain, I was until now so sure it was a female artist from Iran who was going to boykot the Oscar event. I think this artist was a producer. And I was so sure it was a woman. But I guess I must have misunderstood something.
Markus
Or it could be me who's mixing these two things together.
Now I'm getting a little uncertain, I was until now so sure it was a female artist from Iran who was going to boykot the Oscar event. I think this artist was a producer. And I was so sure it was a woman. But I guess I must have misunderstood something.
Markus
Actress
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-38760995
Me neither, but then again, I'm not understanding much of what's coming out of the US at the moment. :yep:
What's so hard about understanding freedom,,, freedom is not being a subject to some one else's mental illnesses.
Me neither, but then again, I'm not understanding much of what's coming out of the US at the moment. :yep:
Indeed.
What's so hard about understanding freedom,,, freedom is not being a subject to some one else's mental illnesses.
Freedom?
This is what I think of your freedom...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca9GuwuOVZc
^ Thank you Oberon :salute:
Back to US politics
I understand that there are people, and some groups in California that want the state to be independent from USA. I also understand that Trump have given "Thumps up" for this.
I have only read it on Danish news, haven't found any English article.
Markus
Platapus
01-28-17, 02:52 PM
^ Thank you Oberon :salute:
Back to US politics
I understand that there are people, and some groups in California that want the state to be independent from USA.
Markus
There are people who want Texas and Alaska to secede from the nation too. Nothing comes of it.
BrucePartington
01-28-17, 03:05 PM
(...) freedom is not being a subject to some one else's mental illnesses.
I concur.........
Bilge_Rat
01-28-17, 03:15 PM
let's see, in 2016, under President Obama,
U.S. Border patrol/ICE:
-stopped 274,821 persons from entering the USA;
-apprehended 415,816 persons;
-detained 352,882 persons;
-arrested 114,434 persons; and
-expulsed 450,954 persons from the USA
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS%20Immigration%20Enforcement%202016.pdf
How predictable that the liberal media is now beginning to publicize individual cases..and how predictable that our own resident liberals are so easiy manipulated. :haha:
Nippelspanner
01-28-17, 03:24 PM
What's so hard about understanding freedom,,, freedom is not being a subject to some one else's mental illnesses.
Oh God that... did hurt to read.
Freedom?
This is what I think of your freedom...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca9GuwuOVZc
and that's what I think of you being a subject.
and that's what I think of you being a subject.
Rather be a subject than live under Trumps presidency. :haha:
let's see, in 2016, under President Obama,
U.S. Border patrol/ICE:
-stopped 274,821 persons from entering the USA;
-apprehended 415,816 persons;
-detained 352,882 persons;
-arrested 114,434 persons; and
-expulsed 450,954 persons from the USA
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS%20Immigration%20Enforcement%202016.pdf
How predictable that the liberal media is now beginning to publicize individual cases..and how predictable that our own resident liberals are so easiy manipulated. :haha:
Riddle me this, did President Obama summarily prohibit entry from seven nations? And, this is the most hilarious bit of this piece of cock-eyed legislature...it completely misses several nations who, if you are going to ban 'Muslim terrorists' you should probably put on the list.
Let's take a look at the last few terrorist attacks in the US perpetrated by those who claim to be Islamic:
9/11 - 1 Egyptian, 15 Saudi Arabians, 2 UAE and 1 Lebanese
Little Rock 2009 - American
Foot Hood 2009 - Palestinian descent
Boston 2013 - Kyrgyzstan
Queens 2014 - American
San Bernardino 2015 - Pakistani descent
Orlando 2016 - US born, Afghan parents
Anyone see Iraqi, Iranian, Libyan, Yemeni, Somalian, Syrian, or Sudanese names on that list?
It's a stupid half-arsed decision which is going to cause a lot of disruption at US airports over the next couple of days. Heck, even his own VP, and even Paul Ryan thought the idea was terrible, but that was before Trump became President and they became invertebrates.
Oh, and you want something funny? Read this:
In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.
Uh huh :hmmm: :har::har::har::har:
Mr Quatro
01-28-17, 08:16 PM
The Iraqi translator for the 101st airborne is currently sitting in detention in JFK airport.
GG :yeah:
Nothing against your post Oberon, but why is this news?
Must be a slow news day ... How many people died in Chicago today is not news that anyone wants to hear? These are anti-Trump drums I hear.
Rather be a subject than live under Trumps presidency. :haha:
http://s19.postimg.org/979ldlu0z/15940391_404905636524165_2150627809859552951_n.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
image free hosting (http://postimage.org/)
:haha:
Nothing against your post Oberon, but why is this news?
Must be a slow news day ... How many people died in Chicago today is not news that anyone wants to hear? These are anti-Trump drums I hear.
Why this now? Because Trump signed the executive order now?
And damn right those are anti-Trump drums, and they are drumming loud and proud. :salute:
http://s19.postimg.org/979ldlu0z/15940391_404905636524165_2150627809859552951_n.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
image free hosting (http://postimage.org/)
:haha:
https://d19fbfhz0hcvd2.cloudfront.net/PR/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Winning-Marketing-Attitudes-Charlie-Sheen-Winning2-220x300.jpg
:up: :haha::haha::haha:
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 09:08 PM
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=1069&pictureid=9329
THE_MASK
01-28-17, 09:29 PM
ANZUS will never be broken .
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=1069&pictureid=9329
:har::har: :yeah:
Oh, and you want something funny? Read this:
Uh huh :hmmm: :har::har::har::har:
ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952, but Obama & the media don't want you to know that. The Immigration and Nationality Act that passed June 27, 1952 revised the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and nationality for the United States. That act, which became Public Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of Aliens to the US and remains in effect today.
Among the many issues it covers, one in particular, found in Chapter 2 Section 212, is the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by "force, violence, or other unconstitutional means." This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States.
This law is being ignored by the White House. Islamic immigration to the U.S. is prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and to the Republic. All Muslims who believe that the Koran is life's guiding principal also believe in total submission to islam & sharia law.
To all who claim that Islam is a religion, read the law again ... the law states that Aliens who are affiliated with ANY "organization" that advocates the overthrow of the U.S. government are prohibited.
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 09:55 PM
@ Oberon,
Glad to see you took my picture the way it was intended.
As a joke/funny stuff.
:salute:
Rather be a subject than live under Trumps presidency. :haha:
Rather Trump than that washed up lying new world order hag.
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 10:06 PM
I think The New World Order is where your wrong yubba.
She was intended to maintain the order of the things that were going on for decades.
We ain't seen the New World Order get started yet.
I don't think Mankind could pull it off in another thousand years.
ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952, but Obama & the media don't want you to know that. The Immigration and Nationality Act that passed June 27, 1952 revised the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and nationality for the United States. That act, which became Public Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of Aliens to the US and remains in effect today.
Among the many issues it covers, one in particular, found in Chapter 2 Section 212, is the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by "force, violence, or other unconstitutional means." This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States.
This law is being ignored by the White House. Islamic immigration to the U.S. is prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and to the Republic. All Muslims who believe that the Koran is life's guiding principal also believe in total submission to islam & sharia law.
To all who claim that Islam is a religion, read the law again ... the law states that Aliens who are affiliated with ANY "organization" that advocates the overthrow of the U.S. government are prohibited.
https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xLd9DJq2l2VFtu/giphy.gif
http://www.snopes.com/islam-banned-u-s-1952/
@ Oberon,
Glad to see you took my picture the way it was intended.
As a joke/funny stuff.
:salute:
:yeah: If only I could say the same for old Yubs...alas I think he actually does believe he what he types, or in this instance copy and pastes. :dead:
Rather Trump than that washed up lying new world order hag.
Looks like your beloved leader has hit sort of a snag, Judge orders a stay against Trump and his ban on Muslim immigrants! Seems like it might be unconstitutional to refuse someone entry into this country on religious reasons.
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 10:22 PM
:yeah: If only I could say the same for old Yubs...alas I think he actually does believe he what he types, or in this instance copy and pastes. :dead:
Gotta give him points for being consistent and predictable.
:D
I mean we all know the Alien Greys control everything right?
;)
I mean we all know the Alien Greys control everything right?
;)
I have no idea what you're talking about, sir...now just look this way a moment...
https://68.media.tumblr.com/9f90cb40ef2580146399b7588a33c966/tumblr_o0ose9Noon1rc0hxao1_400.gif
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 10:28 PM
How the hell did my hamburger get burnt?
:o
Gotta give him points for being consistent and predictable.
:D
I mean we all know the Alien Greys control everything right?
;)
At least I know a invasion when I see it,,, hows those prayer rugs coming along fellas ??? Wow I went and googled European Refugee Violence or Terrorist attacks most recent story was july 2016,, not talking about it won't make it go away..
At least I know a invasion when I see it,,, hows those prayer rugs coming along fellas ???
Very comfy thanks.
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 10:32 PM
At least I know a invasion when I see it,,, hows those prayer rugs coming along fellas ???
I must admit I'm disappointed.
Is that all you got?
:doh:
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 10:34 PM
Very comfy thanks.
You don't count. You ain't in the U.S.A.
You don't count. You ain't in the U.S.A.
No, I'm in the Peoples Theocratic Republic of Yourope according to the Yubbapedia, you know, that communist islamic dictatorship across the Atlantic where there are no freedoms and Muslims roam the streets every night looking for innocent virgins to harvest? :yeah:
Anyway, I must go, I can hear the muezzin calling me to prayer, and I need to get my prayer rug pointing towards Karl Marx strasse while reciting verses from Das Kapital. :yep:
Oh, and Yubs, here's a piece for you to read from that famous liberal think-tank the Cato Institute:
https://www.cato.org/blog/little-national-security-benefit-trumps-executive-order-immigration
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 10:41 PM
I get it.
I got to go myself. I must demo out apartments to be remodeled so all the people Yubs hates can move in under Government funding.
Looks like your beloved leader has hit sort of a snag, Judge orders a stay against Trump and his ban on Muslim immigrants! Seems like it might be unconstitutional to refuse someone entry into this country on religious reasons.
No the New World hit a snag we got a guy in there,, that isn't going to let my country become the world's door mat.,. The muslim Ban passed in 1952 says islam is not compatable with the Constitution,. Islamic immigration to the U.S. is prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and to the Republic. All Muslims who believe that the Koran is life's guiding principal also believe in total submission to islam & sharia law. You know this can be fixed ,, they can have a bacon sammich upon entry.
So, a lot of you really hate Obama, Bill Clinton, and the DEMs, in general; seems like they have a big fan in the Oval Office:
Trump's Executive Order On Ethics Pulls Word For Word From Obama, Clinton -
http://www.npr.org/2017/01/28/512201631/trumps-executive-order-on-ethics-pulls-word-for-word-from-obama-clinton
I guess, when you don't have any real new ideas of your own, and you are given to plagiarism, it just becomes convenient to recycle rather than innovate...
...same swamp, different gators, same results...
<O>
Oh, and Yubs, here's a piece for you to read from that famous liberal think-tank the Cato Institute:
https://www.cato.org/blog/little-national-security-benefit-trumps-executive-order-immigration
HA HA Ha,,, it was liberal thinking that gave you Trump,,, live with that,, now that's funny,, :har::har::har:
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 10:52 PM
The muslim Ban passed in 1952 says islam is not compatable with the Constitution,.
Took me about 2 minutes to see you believe what you want to believe.
Not that the amazed me.
Took me about 2 minutes to see you believe what you want to believe.
Not that the amazed me.
Do please try to keep up; most of us realized that in far less time... :03::haha:
...and I must go, too; my alien gray masters are calling...and I have that meeting of the Trilateral Commission to attend...
<O>
Jeff-Groves
01-28-17, 11:07 PM
Do please try to keep up; most of us realized that in far less time... :03::haha:
...and I must go, too; my alien gray masters are calling...and I have that meeting of the Trilateral Commission to attend...
<O>
I ain't new but it is the best Game since SH3!!
:har:
Took me about 2 minutes to see you believe what you want to believe.
Not that the amazed me.
Yep I believe in the law and you don't,,, the 1952 law says what it says I bet you have the same trouble with the 2nd Amendment..
So, a lot of you really hate Obama, Bill Clinton, and the DEMs, in general; seems like they have a big fan in the Oval Office:
Trump's Executive Order On Ethics Pulls Word For Word From Obama, Clinton -
http://www.npr.org/2017/01/28/512201631/trumps-executive-order-on-ethics-pulls-word-for-word-from-obama-clinton
I guess, when you don't have any real new ideas of your own, and you are given to plagiarism, it just becomes convenient to recycle rather than innovate...
...same swamp, different gators, same results...
<O>
Then why didn't Clinton or Obama act upon there own ideas ???,, I guess it wasn't in their best interest to drain the swamp wasn't it,, that's why you got Trump enjoy..,,, nothing worse than having your own weapon used against you
Here's some more Liberal thinking to cover there double standards
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2015/dec/17/why-trumps-muslim-ban-idea-isnt-really-same-jimmy-/
Then why didn't Clinton or Obama act upon there own ideas ???,, I guess it wasn't in their best interest to drain the swamp wasn't it,, that's why you got Trump enjoy..,,, nothing worse than having your own weapon used against you
Oh, but they did: they issued Executive Orders (you remember, those things that, when they issued them, were a tyrannical, dictatorial attempt to impose their own ideas on the citizens of the US) and they were so good at it, the current Yahoo-In-Chief not only did exactly the same and, to top it off, he liberally (if you'll excuse the term) quoted entire sections of the edicts. Given that you maintain that the almost identical Orders did nothing to "drain the swamp", what makes you think the parroting (or, given Trump's general hue, 'canarying') of those same orders will have any better result? Does repeating, by your estimation, two previous missteps with a third really represent a change, or is it just "business as usual"? Isn't your guy betraying you by adopting, in any form, the actions and/or ideas of those you so vilify? Isn't Trump just, to use your own phrasing, nothing worse than having your own weapon used against you?...
We now await your answer that will neither answer the question nor refute and which will probably entail a reference to some blame to be put on someone else not germane to the question...
<O>
Buddahaid
01-29-17, 03:29 AM
Bravo! :yawn::yawn:
Oh, but they did: they issued Executive Orders (you remember, those things that, when they issued them, were a tyrannical, dictatorial attempt to impose their own ideas on the citizens of the US) and they were so good at it, the current Yahoo-In-Chief not only did exactly the same and, to top it off, he liberally (if you'll excuse the term) quoted entire sections of the edicts. Given that you maintain that the almost identical Orders did nothing to "drain the swamp", what makes you think the parroting (or, given Trump's general hue, 'canarying') of those same orders will have any better result? Does repeating, by your estimation, two previous missteps with a third really represent a change, or is it just "business as usual"? Isn't your guy betraying you by adopting, in any form, the actions and/or ideas of those you so vilify? Isn't Trump just, to use your own phrasing, nothing worse than having your own weapon used against you?...
We now await your answer that will neither answer the question nor refute and which will probably entail a reference to some blame to be put on someone else not germane to the question...
<O>
Now wipe the spittal from your chin,, I don't have a problem with Trump useing the ideas of pass presidents since they were incapable of fulfilling their empty promises,, as long as they are constitutional and do not put a burden on the American citizen.. So Vienna here's a question to you,, do you believe in the rule of law and since I don't know if you are a American you don't have to answer this,, do you believe in the Constitution.??? You still can't accept that it was the actions of the left that gave you a Trump presidency see pal liberal and unamerican actions and thinking do have consequences
https://twitter.com/seanspicer/status/825565510418968578
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3UyrmPUoAEU-SV.jpg
https://media.giphy.com/media/Ow59c0pwTPruU/giphy.gif
And since we were on the topic of who we let in this country,, we are only 2% of the land mass of the whole world we don't have to take in anybody we can't take care of our own ,,, fix your own damn countries. And we don't owe the world nothin,, if wasn't for the sacrifices of this country you'd be eating saurkraut with chop sticks and speaking with a Russian accent,, this is our country and if you don't like it come and do something about it .. I hear the EU is upset with Trump maybe you and your muslim money backers can come up with something,, we seem to hold all the cards that will Trump any actions you take against us,, enjoy the islamification of europe.
https://twitter.com/seanspicer/status/825565510418968578
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3UyrmPUoAEU-SV.jpg
https://media.giphy.com/media/Ow59c0pwTPruU/giphy.gif
Sounds just like the last administration,,NOT.. The left owns Trump just as sure as they hug islam,, everything can be cured with a bacon sammich.
And since we were on the topic of who we let in this country,, we are only 2% of the land mass of the whole world we don't have to take in anybody we can't take care of our own ,,, fix your own damn countries. And we don't owe the world nothin,, if wasn't for the sacrifices of this country you'd be eating saurkraut with chop sticks and speaking with a Russian accent,, this is our country and if you don't like it come and do something about it .. I hear the EU is upset with Trump maybe you and your muslim money backers can come up with something,, we seem to hold all the cards that will Trump any actions you take against us,, enjoy the islamification of europe.
http://cdn.smosh.com/sites/default/files/bloguploads/u-mad-1.jpg
we are only 2% of the land mass of the whole world No, USA land mass is about 7% of the total land mass of Earth, making you the 4th 3rd largest country in the world.
u crank
01-29-17, 10:38 AM
we are only 2% of the land mass of the whole world
No, USA land mass is about 7% of the total land mass of Earth, making you the 4th 3rd largest country in the world.
Depending on how you word it you are both right.
Divide the area of the U.S. by the area of the world:
1. Proportion of total surface area:
Area of U.S.: 3,790,000 sq. mi.
Earth's total surface area: 197,000,000 sq. mi.
3,790,000 / 197,000,000 = 0.0192385787 = about 1.9 %
2. Proportion of total land area (using total area of U.S., including a small amount of water):
Total land area of world: 57,268,900 sq. mi.
3,790,000 / 57,268,900 = 0.0661790256 = about 6.6 %
Now shake hands and get back to work.:haha:
Jimbuna
01-29-17, 10:48 AM
And since we were on the topic of who we let in this country,, we are only 2% of the land mass of the whole world we don't have to take in anybody we can't take care of our own ,,, fix your own damn countries. And we don't owe the world nothin,, if wasn't for the sacrifices of this country you'd be eating saurkraut with chop sticks and speaking with a Russian accent,, this is our country and if you don't like it come and do something about it .. I hear the EU is upset with Trump maybe you and your muslim money backers can come up with something,, we seem to hold all the cards that will Trump any actions you take against us,, enjoy the islamification of europe.
Looking at the above and presuming (an often dangerous concept here in GT admittedly) some if not all of the reference is directed toward the UK.
The UK certainly doesn't owe the US anything in terms of 20th century aid received, it took us many a decade to pay it back in full as well as granting your country rights to ports and bases.
You support Trump and that's fine but don't you think you should keep an open mind as to the consequences of potential isolationism or have you learned nothing of what some of the benefits globalisation can bring and not focus solely on the negatives.
You could of course thank the UK for furnishing you with an internationally understood language, even if you did bastardise it.
I'm beginning to think you may need to consider taking some time out for quiet reflection should you remain so vitriolic in your posting contents.
Riddle me this, did President Obama summarily prohibit entry from seven nations? And, this is the most hilarious bit of this piece of cock-eyed legislature...it completely misses several nations who, if you are going to ban 'Muslim terrorists' you should probably put on the list.
It's a stupid half-arsed decision which is going to cause a lot of disruption at US airports over the next couple of days. Heck, even his own VP, and even Paul Ryan thought the idea was terrible, but that was before Trump became President and they became invertebrates.
no, but they were on his list of "countries of concern" for terrorist's.
President Trump has already said that more countries will be added to the list as needed. If I'm not mistaken under President Bush, there were 28 nations on the "list", Under President Obama the list was pared down to 7. I think under trump the list will now expand at least to the upper teens.
You do realize, that OE's are basically memos telling the different executive branches how to administer laws already on the books. these are not new laws. the Following is what that OE actually does:
The President want's more comprehensive vetting on citizens from certain countries, to achieve that he places a 120 day ban on new applications from those countries while they roll out the new requirements, Those people who have already received their Visa's/green cards will still be allowed into the country although they may be delayed (inconvenienced), while their paperwork is double checked. The governments of the effected governments will also be required to provide more information for the vetting process, and if they refuse, the ban will not be lifted.
no, but they were on his list of "countries of concern" for terrorist's.
President Trump has already said that more countries will be added to the list as needed. If I'm not mistaken under President Bush, there were 28 nations on the "list", Under President Obama the list was pared down to 7. I think under trump the list will now expand at least to the upper teens.
You do realize, that OE's are basically memos telling the different executive branches how to administer laws already on the books. these are not new laws. the Following is what that OE actually does:
The President want's more comprehensive vetting on citizens from certain countries, to achieve that he places a 120 day ban on new applications from those countries while they roll out the new requirements, Those people who have already received their Visa's/green cards will still be allowed into the country although they may be delayed (inconvenienced), while their paperwork is double checked. The governments of the effected governments will also be required to provide more information for the vetting process, and if they refuse, the ban will not be lifted.
That makes a bit more sense, but it really hasn't been implemented that well and has really rather backfired on him in global opinion. But, that seems to be par for the course, and no doubt will be blamed on a liberal conspiracy.
Besides, I can think of a few things that kill more Americans than Muslims do and nothing will ever be done about them. :salute:
Platapus
01-29-17, 11:46 AM
l
How predictable that the liberal media is now beginning to publicize individual cases..and how predictable that our own resident liberals are so easiy manipulated. :haha:
How sad that some people continue to make this a Liberal/Conservative issue instead of recognizing that it is an American Issue.
We need to stop with the "us/them" paradigm. We the people.....
Not we the conservatives. Not we the liberals. Not we the Republicans. Not we the Democrats. We the people need to solve the problems.
The people being manipulated are those who insist that it is a us/them situation. The political parties benefit the more decisive we are. The last thing the political parties want is a united population.
You support Trump and that's fine but don't you think you should keep an open mind as to the consequences of potential isolationism or have you learned nothing of what some of the benefits globalisation can bring and not focus solely on the negatives.
You could of course thank the UK for furnishing you with an internationally understood language, even if you did bastardise it.
I'm beginning to think you may need to consider taking some time out for quiet reflection should you remain so vitriolic in your posting contents.
I'll take that under advisement,, but since there is people continually attacking the POTUS and spreading false information,, I'll continue to defend him and the constitution to my up most ablility and set the record straight as much as it annoys you, with my broken english that still ruffles the lefts feathers because the truth sux for them, after all once a Marine Always a Marine,, not my fault people don't know when they have been sold out and are being invaded,, Marines have been kicking islamic extremist butt for over 200 years,, where do you think from the Shores of Tripoli comes from,, we didn't go there to hug or reason with them.
I think once people have time to assimilate just what is going on, the furor will die out.
Under the circumstances, the "roll-out" was spot on, for a couple of reasons.
because of the way it was rolled out (relevant department heads/managers were the only ones briefed) communication issues were highlighted, and puts those departments on notice to get their act cleaned up.
by not announcing the OE in advance of the implementation, you may catch people with iffy documents in the act.
You also don't give the groups apposed to the policy any time to organize protests or find a judge to block it. (there is a stay but it is very limited in scope).
Onkel Neal
01-29-17, 12:13 PM
I'll take that under advisement,, but since there is people continually attacking the POTUS and spreading false information,, I'll continue to defend him and the constitution to my up most ablility and set the record straight ....
That's fine, but like Jim requested, just try to tone it down a bit.
u crank
01-29-17, 12:15 PM
The last thing the political parties media wants is a united population.
Closer to the truth. :03:
Marines have been kicking islamic extremist butt for over 200 years,, where do you think from the Shores of Tripoli comes from,, we didn't go there to hug or reason with them.
One foray in 1904 hardly makes for 'over 200 years'...
Not a slur on the USMC, just pointing it out.
One foray in 1904 hardly makes for 'over 200 years'...
Not a slur on the USMC, just pointing it out.
Actually 1801 under Jefferson. Barbary pirates
Actually 1801 under Jefferson. Barbary pirates
Ah, my apologies, two then. Again, no slight, I mean, the US is a young country after all. Europe has been playing tug of war with the Middle East since...well, probably since the two spheres met, interrupted only by the Mongols and the occasional Viking raid.
Ah, my apologies, two then. Again, no slight, I mean, the US is a young country after all. Europe has been playing tug of war with the Middle East since...well, probably since the two spheres met, interrupted only by the Mongols and the occasional Viking raid.U.S. Marines tend to get a bit touchy when it comes to their history. And while they like to brag about all the different places they fought, they tend to gloss over the fact that it's us Navy boys that got them there :D
U.S. Marines tend to get a bit touchy when it comes to their history. And while they like to brag about all the different places they fought, they tend to gloss over the fact that it's us Navy boys that got them there :D
:haha: I imagine it's the same on this side too. :salute: I'm glad that our two Marine forces work together well, an unstoppable force when you get them going. This is part of why I hope that you guys don't go so isolationist, and that we don't go isolationist, because we can work well together and work well with Europe and keep things on the straight and level.
em2nought
01-29-17, 02:01 PM
:haha: This is part of why I hope that you guys don't go so isolationist, and that we don't go isolationist, because we can work well together and work well with Europe and keep things on the straight and level.
Don't you think the rest of Western Europe is already lost? They've lost the will to fight, albeit against a different form of foreign invasion. I bet that line of reasoning is more than anything responsible for the Brexit vote.
As for globalization, the only export I need from "that" region is a good Döner kebab and I can't even get that. :D
Naah, Western Europe isn't lost, it's survived worse than what's being thrown at it right now. The only thing that can destroy Western Europe is Western Europe destroying itself, and we've already tried that twice in the last century, I hope that we don't go for a third time lucky in this one.
Think of all the various migrations and conflicts that have spread through-out Europe since the fall of Rome, and indeed, since before then, and here we are. Everything that has been before has made us what we are now, a mixture of just about every single culture and race which exists, all blending into each other, changing each other, molding each other. Some people will hold out, will try to cling to what they think is 'pure' and 'clean' but eventually everything changes.
Aktungbby
01-29-17, 02:33 PM
Europe has been playing tug of war with the Middle East since...well, probably since the two spheres met, interrupted only by the Mongols and the occasional Viking raid. AHEM You're overlooking the Donald Trump of his day: Harald Hardrada ...The 'Byzantine' warrior (and half brother of St Olaf:up:) who invaded England...only to learn the 'arrow of his ways"! Rich, greedy, a total narcissist and an inflator of his own saga....http://i2.wp.com/www.realmofhistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Facts_Harald_Hardrada_Last_Great_Viking_7.jpg?resi ze=770%2C512:O: Becoming slightly...deflated! :doh: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Hardrada (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Hardrada)
You could of course thank the UK for furnishing you with an internationally understood language, even if you did bastardise it.
It's bastardize with a "z" and we didn't bastardize the language, we improved (greatly) upon it.
After all what hell of extra letters would the world be in without our improvements such as "airplane" over your provincial "aeroplane" or "color" over "colour"? Where I ask you? Taking too much time writing bad poetry instead of keeping the Germans from over running Europe, that's where! :)
AHEM You're overlooking the Donald Trump of his day: Harald Hardrada ...The 'Byzantine' warrior (and half brother of St Olaf:up:) who invaded England...only to learn the 'arrow of his ways"! Rich, greedy, a total narcissist and an inflator of his own saga....:O: Becoming slightly...deflated! :doh: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Hardrada (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Hardrada)
Indeed, but his defeat allowed Duke William II to get a new improved nickname.
Aktungbby
01-29-17, 03:09 PM
Indeed, but his defeat allowed Duke William II to get a new improved nickname.
I see somebody reads my posts!:Dhttp://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2454244&postcount=1683 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2454244&postcount=1683)
Earlier this evening I read a member mentioned that Islam was forbidden by American laws in 1952.
I made a search and found this wiki-page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952
How can this information be transformed into-"They banned Islam in 1952" from all the information on this page ?
Markus
Onkel Neal
01-29-17, 03:47 PM
So, Trump sets his Muslim travel ban, but he left Saudia Arabia off. Fail.
So, Trump sets his Muslim travel ban, but he left Saudia Arabia off. Fail.
That sort of thing happens here Neal, so I take it like the UK the Saudi's are buying military goods. :hmmm:
That sort of thing happens here Neal, so I take it like the UK the Saudi's are buying military goods. :hmmm:
Oh, it gets better old chap, we just inked a deal with Turkey to sell them some jets, because that Erdogan seems like a trustworthy fellow.
:dead:
How can this information be transformed into-"They banned Islam in 1952" from all the information on this page ?
Markus
Same way that Bush did 9/11.
ikalugin
01-29-17, 04:16 PM
The only thing that can destroy Western Europe is Western Europe destroying itself. Europe since the fall of Rome.
Remember how Romans invited the barbarians under the guise of slaves being offered?
Catfish
01-29-17, 04:31 PM
Oh, it gets better old chap, we just inked a deal with Turkey to sell them some jets, because that Erdogan seems like a trustworthy fellow.
:dead:
So this will boost the UK economics after brexit !
A royal toast to a fruitful future between your countries :yeah:
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y174/penaeus/wtf_zpsu04snu08.jpg (http://s5.photobucket.com/user/penaeus/media/wtf_zpsu04snu08.jpg.html)
Remember how Romans invited the barbarians under the guise of slaves being offered?
Well, they used them a lot as mercenaries mainly. Most of the Roman army was made up of mercenaries from all over the 'barbarian' lands, mainly Germanic. In regards to the fall of Rome, the attacks by the Visigoths and Vandals were only one part of the collapse of a system which had been failing for centuries, I mean how many times were there major disagreements (aka civil wars) over who was going to be the next Emperor? I mean, that's after you get the Diocletian split.
I guess one could argue that we're heading into a Toynbeean process of decay, certainly when you read on wikipedia the following paragraphs:
He argues that, as civilizations decay, they form an "Internal Proletariat" and an "External Proletariat." The Internal proletariat is held in subjugation by the dominant minority inside the civilization, and grows bitter; the external proletariat exists outside the civilization in poverty and chaos, and grows envious. He argues that as civilizations decay, there is a "schism in the body social," whereby abandon and self-control together replace creativity, and truancy and martyrdom together replace discipleship by the creative minority.
He argues that in this environment, people resort to archaism (idealization of the past), futurism (idealization of the future), detachment (removal of oneself from the realities of a decaying world), and transcendence (meeting the challenges of the decaying civilization with new insight, as a Prophet). He argues that those who Transcend during a period of social decay give birth to a new Church with new and stronger spiritual insights, around which a subsequent civilization may begin to form after the old has died.
Toynbee's use of the word 'church' refers to the collective spiritual bond of a common worship, or the same unity found in some kind of social order.
The great irony expressed by these and others like them is that civilizations that seem ideally designed to creatively solve problems, find themselves doing so self-destructively.
I can certainly see Archaism, Futurism, Detachment in the world today, although not a lot of Transcendence, because as it stands I don't think anyone has any answers that are going to not end in a whole lot of bloodshed, and with the weapons that we have made for ourselves I don't know if humanity can survive descending into that level of violence.
Earlier this evening I read a member mentioned that Islam was forbidden by American laws in 1952.
I made a search and found this wiki-page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952
How can this information be transformed into-"They banned Islam in 1952" from all the information on this page ?
Markus They base their conclusion on Post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning. law '141' covers the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by "force, violence, or other unconstitutional means. you can find the 'relevant'
part of the law in Chap. 2 sect.212
ikalugin
01-29-17, 04:55 PM
Oberon, I was talking about that one where the Rome was sieged.
Well, they used them a lot as mercenaries mainly. Most of the Roman army was made up of mercenaries from all over the 'barbarian' lands, mainly Germanic. In regards to the fall of Rome, the attacks by the Visigoths and Vandals were only one part of the collapse of a system which had been failing for centuries, I mean how many times were there major disagreements (aka civil wars) over who was going to be the next Emperor? I mean, that's after you get the Diocletian split.
I guess one could argue that we're heading into a Toynbeean process of decay, certainly when you read on wikipedia the following paragraphs:
I can certainly see Archaism, Futurism, Detachment in the world today, although not a lot of Transcendence, because as it stands I don't think anyone has any answers that are going to not end in a whole lot of bloodshed, and with the weapons that we have made for ourselves I don't know if humanity can survive descending into that level of violence.
-makes a troll face-
Well, maybe Europe has been going through decay for the past 50 years (with loss of the colonial empires)? Would certainly be consistent with invitation of barbarians.
They base their conclusion on Post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning. law '141' covers the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by "force, violence, or other unconstitutional means. you can find the 'relevant'
part of the law in Chap. 2 sect.212
I'm pretty sure it wasn't Islam your former politicians had in mind when they wrote this law "141" I'm sure they were thinking - Communism.
Markus
I'm pretty sure it wasn't Islam your former politicians had in mind when they wrote this law "141" I'm sure they were thinking - Communism.
Markus no it wasn't, but if you can stretch/twist the meaning of the law far enough you can probably get the girl scouts banned in the U.S.
no it wasn't, but if you can stretch/twist the meaning of the law far enough you can probably get the girl scouts banned in the U.S.
True indeed.
Markus
One foray in 1904 hardly makes for 'over 200 years'...
Not a slur on the USMC, just pointing it out.
and you say you'r a historian..that would be 2 forays, just pointing it out,, mate.
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/age-jefferson-and-madison/essays/avast-how-us-built-navy-sent-marines-and-faced-down-
Looks like the swamp is getting drained, like it or not...
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TRUMP_LOBBYING_BAN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Oberon, I was talking about that one where the Rome was sieged.
-makes a troll face-
Well, maybe Europe has been going through decay for the past 50 years (with loss of the colonial empires)? Would certainly be consistent with invitation of barbarians.
Do you mean by the Gauls or the Visigoths? By the time Alaric got around to hitting the place the Empire was well into its decline after the Crisis of the Third Century...and funnily enough, one of the effects was the collapse of the Roman trading network and the increase of localism, with towns and cities walling themselves in and instigating semi-feudal practices in some areas.
One could definitely make that argument about Europe, though let's not forget that out of these barbarians the new Europe was made which would eventually become the Europe of today. :hmmm: So, if the model plays out, if we are looking at the end of the new Rome, then what follows is not necessarily going to work out inferior to what exists now, but different.
and you say you'r a historian..that would be 2 forays, just pointing it out,, mate.
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/age-jefferson-and-madison/essays/avast-how-us-built-navy-sent-marines-and-faced-down-
Already been pointed out and acknowledged.
Onkel Neal
01-29-17, 06:42 PM
That sort of thing happens here Neal, so I take it like the UK the Saudi's are buying military goods. :hmmm:
Yeah, just so. If Trump was really serious, SA would have been at the top of the list. Just as I suspected, he's a wimp.
Yeah, just so. If Trump was really serious, SA would have been at the top of the list. Just as I suspected, he's a wimp.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest/img/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest_twitter.png?v=1
:03:
Aktungbby
01-29-17, 08:27 PM
Considering that attack planner Atta https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Mohamed_Atta.jpg/200px-Mohamed_Atta.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mohamed_Atta.jpg) was the pilot of the Jetliner that crashed the World trade center on 9/11 and from Egypt I'm appalled: The rest were Saudi's; and two were from United Arab Emirate with one from Lebanon, the ban misses the mark entirely.
Hijackers:
Mohamed Atta (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta) 33 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/Flag_of_Egypt.svg/23px-Flag_of_Egypt.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt) American Airlines Flight 11 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_11) Abdulaziz al-Omari (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdulaziz_al-Omari) 22 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Wail al-Shehri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wail_al-Shehri) 28 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Waleed al-Shehri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waleed_al-Shehri) 22 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Satam al-Suqami (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satam_al-Suqami) 25 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Marwan al-Shehhi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwan_al-Shehhi) 23 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Flag_of_the_United_Arab_Emirates.svg/23px-Flag_of_the_United_Arab_Emirates.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates) United Airlines Flight 175 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_175) Fayez Banihammad (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fayez_Banihammad) 24 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Flag_of_the_United_Arab_Emirates.svg/23px-Flag_of_the_United_Arab_Emirates.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates) Mohand al-Shehri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohand_al-Shehri) 22 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Hamza al-Ghamdi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamza_al-Ghamdi) 20 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Ahmed al-Ghamdi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_al-Ghamdi) 22 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Hani Hanjour (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hani_Hanjour) 29 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) American Airlines Flight 77 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_77) Khalid al-Mihdhar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_al-Mihdhar) 26 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Majed Moqed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majed_Moqed) 24 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Nawaf al-Hazmi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nawaf_al-Hazmi) 25 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Salem al-Hazmi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_al-Hazmi) 20 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Ziad Jarrah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziad_Jarrah) 26 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/Flag_of_Lebanon.svg/23px-Flag_of_Lebanon.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon) United Airlines Flight 93 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_93) Ahmed al-Haznawi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_al-Haznawi) 20 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Ahmed al-Nami (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_al-Nami) 24 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) Saeed al-Ghamdi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saeed_al-Ghamdi) 21 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia)
One thing that's slipped off the radar while this whole ban thing is going on is the shake-up of the National Security Council, with Steven Bannon being inserted in and the Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff being removed, and it's going to be headed up by Mike Flynn...so it's probably just as well that the DNI is excluded because last I checked Flynn was still under investigation for his communications with Russian officials.
It's...well, it's certainly something to watch, and it's only been a week. :hmmm:
u crank
01-29-17, 08:41 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest/img/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest_twitter.png?v=1
:03:
How many other Americans and Brits have business ties with those countries?
Of the seven nations listed, six could be considered failed states with a high level of terrorist activity. The other, Iran is an active state sponsor of terrorism and a sworn enemy of the USA.
Saudi Arabia is fighting a proxy war with Iran in Yemen, one of the states on the list. Which side is America backing? :hmmm:
Mr Quatro
01-29-17, 08:52 PM
One thing that's slipped off the radar while this whole ban thing is going on is the shake-up of the National Security Council, with Steven Bannon being inserted in and the Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff being removed, and it's going to be headed up by Mike Flynn...so it's probably just as well that the DNI is excluded because last I checked Flynn was still under investigation for his communications with Russian officials.
It's...well, it's certainly something to watch, and it's only been a week. :hmmm:
The order to launch missile's comes from the POTUS, but the message or the permission to launch missile's actually comes from the Joint Chiefs of Staff ...
So now instead of the chairman being on the inside ... now he is on the outside.
Sounds like Trump doesn't trust outsiders ...
How can the Joint Chiefs of Staff trust a piece of paper from the National Security Council? They will need a voice print to make sure it is Trump. :)
47 muslim majority nations in the world. Trump temporarily freezes immigration from just 7 of these countries that are either torn apart by jihadist violence or under the control of hostile, jihadist governments.
Yet to the Democrats and their media lapdogs its: "OMG he's banning Muslims"! "He's a racist"!!!
47 muslim majority nations in the world. Trump temporarily freezes immigration from just 7 of these countries that are either torn apart by jihadist violence or under the control of hostile, jihadist governments.
Yet to the Democrats and their media lapdogs its: "OMG he's banning Muslims"! "He's a racist"!!!
You're the Alt-Right lapdog who believes everything coming out of Trumps and Bannons mouth, so I wouldn't talk to darn loud!:haha:
How many other Americans and Brits have business ties with those countries?
But how many other Americans and Brits are the President of the US? :hmmm: :03:
You're the Alt-Right lapdog who believes everything coming out of Trumps and Bannons mouth, so I wouldn't talk to darn loud!:haha:
I am? So what does that make you? An alt-left lapdog whining in impotent rage at the actions of your betters because your evil queen lost? Get used to failure because your side has learned nothing and will continue to loose power.
Rockstar
01-29-17, 11:18 PM
This just in!
https://i.imgur.com/CKgIwxZ.jpg
ikalugin
01-30-17, 01:59 AM
So, if the model plays out, if we are looking at the end of the new Rome, then what follows is not necessarily going to work out inferior to what exists now, but different.
(this is a humorous discussion, not to be taken tooooo seriously)
After the dark ages pass, sure there would be a new renaissance we would see a different civilisation develop on the ashes of the old. The problem is that even with the acceleration of the historic processes and the increases in the life expectancy I doubt that we would live past the dark ages to see it.
If we extend that analogy I live in the Byzantium btw. I hope no 4th crusade happens any time soon.
AVGWarhawk
01-30-17, 09:22 AM
You're the Alt-Right lapdog who believes everything coming out of Trumps and Bannons mouth, so I wouldn't talk to darn loud!:haha:
It is not a matter of believing what comes from Trump. The President(any) is permitted to ban immigration. Past Presidents have done so with less fanfare.
AVGWarhawk
01-30-17, 09:26 AM
That sort of thing happens here Neal, so I take it like the UK the Saudi's are buying military goods. :hmmm:
And the US is buying oil. My guess is the spigots turning off if the USA does not play nice. Then again, the US has opened the reserve spigots when needed.
Certainly a game of chess.
Rockin Robbins
01-30-17, 10:37 AM
47 muslim majority nations in the world. Trump temporarily freezes immigration from just 7 of these countries that are either torn apart by jihadist violence or under the control of hostile, jihadist governments.
Yet to the Democrats and their media lapdogs its: "OMG he's banning Muslims"! "He's a racist"!!!
Not only that but he chose those 7 countries because they have been recognized by Congress and Homeland Security as state sponsors of terrorism. In other words, he used the judgment of his opponents as the criteria on which to base the reasonable and prudent policy. It may be that most of the 911 terrorists were residents of Saudi Arabia, but it is a far stretch from saying they lived there and saying that the Saudi government sent them here and trained them for the purpose of flying airliners into the World Trade Center.
However, the alt-left doesn't care about that. They are only concerned with turning a prudent move into an outrageous religious litmus test. And of course they choose to completely ignore the fact that this is only a 90 day action in order to tighten up screening of refugees. And they expect reasonable and normal citizens not to laugh at them. They really are that out of touch.
We know that Muslim extremist organizations have pledged to insert their operatives within the legitimate refugees. We know they have succeeded in Europe, leading to hundreds of deaths. We know they will succeed this side of the pond if we do nothing to defend ourselves. We know the first duty of every nation is to protect the lives of its citizens. We know the alt-left cares nothing for any of this. There's a reason they are powerless. They DESERVE to be powerless. We will protect them anyway.
Question for all snowflakes: was there unrestricted "immigration" from Germany and other Axis countries during World War II? Why not? We are in World War III whether we choose to defend ourselves or not. What did the 911 commission say 13 years ago or so? "They were at war with us while we were not at war with them." Nothing has changed. Refusing to defend yourself against evil is not the definition of enlightenment. It is the definition of foolishness.
It is perfectly legal to be foolish. And we will protect the lives of our foolish citizens. We know they will not appreciate that we saved their miserable lives, but that is not why we act. We act because all Americans deserve protection regardless of belief, race, party affiliation, creed, religion or foolishness.
One could definitely make that argument about Europe, though let's not forget that out of these barbarians the new Europe was made which would eventually become the Europe of today. :hmmm: So, if the model plays out, if we are looking at the end of the new Rome, then what follows is not necessarily going to work out inferior to what exists now, but different.
Let's try to skip the petty wars and 1500 years of religious persecution this time, though. :)
Buddahaid
01-30-17, 10:48 AM
"Snowflakes." If you want to have debates over issues that people are worried about across the board, don't use inflammatory labels. It renders your arguments less potent.
AVGWarhawk
01-30-17, 10:58 AM
Well, to what end anyway? A terrorist simply needs to fly to Mexico and cross the border.
Well, to what end anyway? A terrorist simply needs to fly to Mexico and cross the border.
Hence the reason for a border wall, try to keep up:03:.
AVGWarhawk
01-30-17, 11:23 AM
Hence the reason for a border wall, try to keep up:03:.
That's point. :03:
Rockstar
01-30-17, 11:28 AM
"Snowflakes." If you want to have debates over issues that people are worried about across the board, don't use inflammatory labels. It renders your arguments less potent.
No it doesnt
Buddahaid
01-30-17, 11:42 AM
Sure it does. It implies the argument doesn't stand on it's own just like qualifying a statement with to be honest implies your not otherwise.
Rockin Robbins
01-30-17, 11:43 AM
So, if the model plays out, if we are looking at the end of the new Rome, then what follows is not necessarily going to work out inferior to what exists now, but different.
What a fractured thought process! Europe has no resemblance to the Roman Empire at all. There is no new Rome to end.
Rome was an economic system built on a bedrock of slavery, slaves acquired through wars of conquest on surrounding areas. When Rome had nowhere to expand, and thus, no affordable (the barbarians left were mighty tough cookies) source of slaves, the economy could do nothing but collapse and take its empire with it. Good Caesar or bad Caesar, their options were nil. Looking steadfastly back toward past glories, they were condemned to accept that their primary strength, the bulwark of their greatness, slaves, was also their fatal weakness. Rome was nothing but a gigantic Ponzi scheme which ran out of victims.
Where are the European Union slaves? Where were those great conquests which produced them? Show me the mighty EU Legions. Your argument is pure poppycock. Ridiculous poppycock. You wouldn't know Rome if it bit you in the patootie.:D:D
Actually the only one in recent times who tried to recreate Rome was Adolf Hitler. But he foolishly killed his own slaves because he didn't understand how Rome worked. And in Rome, since they realized that slaves were the center of their economic well-being, treating your slaves well was the mark of a good Roman citizen. Hitler misunderstood that Roman value as well. Stupid man.
"Snowflakes." If you want to have debates over issues that people are worried about across the board, don't use inflammatory labels. It renders your arguments less potent.
Oh, you mean like how the left calls people racist if they don't agree with the lefts point of view,,, they have learned nothing.. I do not like being called fascist or alt right,,, because those are far left from my point of view,, which brings up the question just how far left of Stalin are you.???
Aktungbby
01-30-17, 11:54 AM
You're the Alt-Right lapdog who believes everything coming out of Trumps and Bannons mouth, so I wouldn't talk to darn loud!:haha:
I am? So what does that make you? An alt-left lapdog whining in impotent rage at the actions of your betters because your evil queen lost? Get used to failure because your side has learned nothing and will continue to loose power.
Question for all snowflakes:
]"Snowflakes."[/B] If you want to have debates over issues that people are worried about across the board, don't use inflammatory labels. It renders your arguments less potent.
No it doesnt
NOPE it sure doesn't: it's just not Minnesota Nice:up: (The Jessie Ventura Effect: or how Trump got elected in the first place:03:)http://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/newshour/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/RTR5UD-1024x660.jpg Trump came to Minnesota to raise money for the Reform Party’s highest elected official, Gov. Ventura, who made it clear that he and the New York developer were on the same wavelength. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/before-trump-there-was-jesse-ventura-and-an-improbable-victory/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/before-trump-there-was-jesse-ventura-and-an-improbable-victory/)
But Ventura’s typical voter was younger, largely male and “for the most part regarded the election as a giant kegger Having, in my youth, secured 280+ half-barrels of a certain brew for rugby and fraternity social events myself:Kaleun_Cheers: ...:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/cc/12/f5/cc12f52fd1c996610f08a90cb76a7799.jpg
AVGWarhawk
01-30-17, 12:13 PM
"Snowflakes." If you want to have debates over issues that people are worried about across the board, don't use inflammatory labels. It renders your arguments less potent.
Talking about labels....Xenophobic, homophobic, Islamaphobic.
Rockin Robbins
01-30-17, 12:19 PM
"Snowflakes" is a term of endearment. It's like Memaw, or Granny, they might not know how to take care of themselves or others, fall victim to fraudsters, can't be trusted to defend themselves against those who seek their harm, can't say no to a solicitor on the phone, but we love them and defend them.
However, the derogatory terms of the left: homophobe, islamophobe, xenophobe, neo-con, racist, etc, are first of all false, but also terms for those who are hated, who have no right to be heard, who probably should be gassed and burned, whose businesses need to be burned, who need to be deprived of any means of earning a living through boycotts, bans, legal and illegal action. They are terms for those who are unilaterally deemed no longer to have human rights: those to be destroyed by any means necessary.
The right seeks to persuade. The left seeks to compel. That alone automatically makes my decision. In a system of persuasion, I can change things for the better, even in an overall atmosphere I disagree with. In a system of coercion and compulsion the wiggy wigs rule all with no checks or balances. Leftist thinking cannot succeed anyway. There is no way to compel the heart of man. It can only be persuaded. All excellence is entirely voluntary. We love them anyway.
Note that no leftist has responded to my questions: Can you provide evidence of unrestricted "immigration" of German or other Axis citizens into the US during World War II? Why was it not allowed? Was that wrong, or just good common sense in executing the first duty of any legitimate government: to protect the lives and property of its citizens? Pay attention to the term of endearment. Ignore the substance of the position. It is the way of life for a snowflake.
"Snowflakes" is a term of endearment.
Actually, the politicised use of the term originates from those opposed to the ending of slavery (https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/the-less-lovely-side-of-snowflake).
Mr Quatro
01-30-17, 01:24 PM
Actually the only one in recent times who tried to recreate Rome was Adolf Hitler. But he foolishly killed his own slaves because he didn't understand how Rome worked. And in Rome, since they realized that slaves were the center of their economic well-being, treating your slaves well was the mark of a good Roman citizen. Hitler misunderstood that Roman value as well. Stupid man.
There were psychological reasons to own slaves too ... to lord it over someone, to make someone lower than yourself, to feel better because you are higher than they are and don't have to work anymore.
But Hitler didn't kill the Jews ... God did so that he could bring them home to Israel. The state of Israel had ceased to exist in 70 ad and therefore for the prophesies of the Bible to come true there has to be an Israel, which by the miracle of the UN and President Truman there was awarded land for the Jews to settle on established as the statehood of Israel May 1948. I won't continue in this vain, but just plant a seed.
Yes society needs slaves that make $15 an hour in fast food places I'll leave it at that :yep:
What a fractured thought process! Europe has no resemblance to the Roman Empire at all. There is no new Rome to end.
Rome was an economic system built on a bedrock of slavery, slaves acquired through wars of conquest on surrounding areas. When Rome had nowhere to expand, and thus, no affordable (the barbarians left were mighty tough cookies) source of slaves, the economy could do nothing but collapse and take its empire with it. Good Caesar or bad Caesar, their options were nil. Looking steadfastly back toward past glories, they were condemned to accept that their primary strength, the bulwark of their greatness, slaves, was also their fatal weakness. Rome was nothing but a gigantic Ponzi scheme which ran out of victims.
Where are the European Union slaves? Where were those great conquests which produced them? Show me the mighty EU Legions. Your argument is pure poppycock. Ridiculous poppycock. You wouldn't know Rome if it bit you in the patootie.:D:D
Actually the only one in recent times who tried to recreate Rome was Adolf Hitler. But he foolishly killed his own slaves because he didn't understand how Rome worked. And in Rome, since they realized that slaves were the center of their economic well-being, treating your slaves well was the mark of a good Roman citizen. Hitler misunderstood that Roman value as well. Stupid man.
You like to take things literally, don't you? Of course Europe doesn't have slaves, well...except for the Greeks. But it has an economy based on free movement, and it has expanded constantly since its creation. You want EU Legions? Try an army of bureaucrats. You can draw similarities,and it wasn't just the economy that collapsed in Rome, it was a multitude of factors.
It was a theory, a ponderance, an exercise in thought that I was undertaking with ikalugin. If it triggers you that much, feel free to ignore it. :03:
Aktungbby
01-30-17, 01:32 PM
Yes society needs slaves that make $15 an hour in fast food places I'll leave it at thathttps://s27.postimg.org/mfh3kh0ub/5884a1bcc3ee9.png (http://m.onsol.ru/direct/go/aHR0cDovL3F1ZXN0dW5pdC5jb20vY2wvci1TUE5QUzBTR0hDRF NCRFA0UzFDN1NPQjNTMjcyM1MzTVMwU0xTSVMxUzFGT1NFM0dT MA==)Payable in new 'coin of the realm'! (this ad just appeared in my 'suspect mail'??!!)
VipertheSniper
01-30-17, 01:35 PM
"Snowflakes" is a term of endearment. It's like Memaw, or Granny, they might not know how to take care of themselves or others, fall victim to fraudsters, can't be trusted to defend themselves against those who seek their harm, can't say no to a solicitor on the phone, but we love them and defend them.
That's not endearment, that's patronizing and it is pure hypocrisy, that's exactly what I always read the "left" being accused of in this very forum, that they think they know what's best for everybody. So how is this any different? Not to say that some on the left don't behave like they've got the monopoly on truth. Still, you're doing the same thing here.
However, the derogatory terms of the left: homophobe, islamophobe, xenophobe, neo-con, racist, etc, are first of all false, but also terms for those who are hated, who have no right to be heard, who probably should be gassed and burned, whose businesses need to be burned, who need to be deprived of any means of earning a living through boycotts, bans, legal and illegal action. They are terms for those who are unilaterally deemed no longer to have human rights: those to be destroyed by any means necessary.
Where did you get that nugget from? Mein Kampf?
The right seeks to persuade. The left seeks to compel. That alone automatically makes my decision. In a system of persuasion, I can change things for the better, even in an overall atmosphere I disagree with. In a system of coercion and compulsion the wiggy wigs rule all with no checks or balances. Leftist thinking cannot succeed anyway. There is no way to compel the heart of man. It can only be persuaded. All excellence is entirely voluntary.
I'm not seeing any persuasion happening on either side of the aisle to be fair.
Onkel Neal
01-30-17, 01:42 PM
"Snowflakes." If you want to have debates over issues that people are worried about across the board, don't use inflammatory labels. It renders your arguments less potent.
Good point.
Platapus
01-30-17, 03:40 PM
Closer to the truth. :03:
Since the for profit news entertainment industry makes it money by cultivating interest, you are correct.
Platapus
01-30-17, 04:29 PM
There is a long standing tradition of former presidents not criticizing their successor.
Few people are as critical about Bush than I am, but I have to acknowledge that Bush refrained from breaking this tradition.
Obama on the other hand. :nope:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/obama-donald-trump-travel-ban-statement/index.html
Former President Barack Obama criticized President Donald Trump's executive order (http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/obama-statement-on-trump-ban-protests/index.html)curbing immigration in a statement on Monday, backing protesters who have taken to the nation's airports to express their displeasure with Trump's action on Friday."The President fundamentally disagrees with the notion of discriminating against individuals because of their faith or religion," said Kevin Lewis, spokesman for the former president, in a statement.
...
This is first time Obama, who ceded power to Trump 10 days ago, has criticized the current president, breaking with an unwritten rule that former presidents refrain from criticizing the current White House occupant. I fear this may not be the last.
Yes technically he is just an ordinary citizen with the right of expression, but there is a reason why this tradition is in place.
I don't think what he is doing is right, even if I agree with him on this issue.
Bilge_Rat
01-30-17, 05:02 PM
so, was not necessarily going to get into this, but considering the current media meltdown, it seems appropriate.
From Rasmussen reports:
Most Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist Havens
Most voters approve of President Trump’s temporary halt to refugees and visitors from several Middle Eastern and African countries until the government can do a better job of keeping out individuals who are terrorist threats.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until the federal government approves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Thirty-three percent (33%) are opposed, while 10% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Similarly, 56% favor a temporary block on visas prohibiting residents of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States until the government approves its ability to screen for likely terrorists. Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose this temporary ban, and 11% are undecided.
This survey was taken late last week prior to the weekend protests against Trump’s executive orders imposing a four-month ban on all refugees and a temporary visa ban on visitors from these seven countries.
These findings have changed little from August when 59% of voters agreed with Trump’s call for a temporary ban on immigration into the United States from "the most dangerous and volatile regions of the world that have a history of exporting terrorism” until the federal government improves its ability to screen out potential terrorists.
(...)
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on January 25-26, 2017 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Only 16% of Americans think this country can ever be made completely safe from terrorist attacks in general, although 52% of voters say the federal government does not focus enough on the threat of domestic Islamic terrorism.
The refugee ban is supported by 82% of Republicans and 59% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Democrats are opposed by a 53% to 34% margin. The numbers are nearly identical for the temporary ban on visas from these seven terrorist-plagued nations.
Men and women are in general agreement on both measures. Younger voters are slightly less supportive than their elders are.
Blacks oppose both bans more than whites and other majority voters do.
Among voters who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing, over 70% support both bans. Similar numbers of those who Strongly Disapprove of his job performance are opposed.
http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/january_2017/most_support_temporary_ban_on_newcomers_from_terro rist_havens
so a majority of voters, including a majority of Republicans and Independents approve of Trump's temporary ban while a majority of Democrats oppose it.
I am not arguing whether the ban is correct or not, but as usual, Democrats are mis-reading the mood of the country.
Going into a full all-out war with the Trump administration over this issue is really playing Trump's (and Bannon's) game. It is much more likely to solidify Republican/independent support for Trump than the opposite.
There is a difference between effective opposition and all-out hysteria.
Well first off the role of our government is to protect the interest of this country and, the American Citizen,, not the people of other countries,,, no person from another has the right to just come here, and the constitution does not extend to people of other countries .. It is not American nor is it constitutional to import people into this country unscreened ,, to change the the culture so one party benefits in votes.., We have a right to expect our government to secure our borders and up hold the law. Democrats are worse than a 4 year old wanting a puppy and will throw tantrums till they get what they want..
The left has cried it is unconstitutional and unamerican to keep people out that might be a threat,,, how so ???
Skybird
01-30-17, 07:17 PM
What a fractured thought process! Europe has no resemblance to the Roman Empire at all. There is no new Rome to end.
Rome was an economic system built on a bedrock of slavery, slaves acquired through wars of conquest on surrounding areas. When Rome had nowhere to expand, and thus, no affordable (the barbarians left were mighty tough cookies) source of slaves, the economy could do nothing but collapse and take its empire with it. Good Caesar or bad Caesar, their options were nil. Looking steadfastly back toward past glories, they were condemned to accept that their primary strength, the bulwark of their greatness, slaves, was also their fatal weakness. Rome was nothing but a gigantic Ponzi scheme which ran out of victims.
Where are the European Union slaves? Where were those great conquests which produced them? Show me the mighty EU Legions. Your argument is pure poppycock. Ridiculous poppycock. You wouldn't know Rome if it bit you in the patootie.:D:D
Actually the only one in recent times who tried to recreate Rome was Adolf Hitler. But he foolishly killed his own slaves because he didn't understand how Rome worked. And in Rome, since they realized that slaves were the center of their economic well-being, treating your slaves well was the mark of a good Roman citizen. Hitler misunderstood that Roman value as well. Stupid man.
Rome eroded from within since it allowed to lose the skill of tradership and craftsmanship, and depended more and more on the services of others (other factions, slaves, whatever) to fulfill the needs of its extremely centralised design. At the same time when this vulnerability became a real big problem, corruption and incompetence, coupled with a growing mass of needed reforms that were hindered by an exploding and increasingly incompetent (or unwilling) bureaucracy, grew and formed up with the before mentioned loss of own skill and competence. In the end, Rome was a big body being so weak that it could no longer resist and defend against the pressure of foreign people moving into its former realms. It became unwilling to fight, and it could not live by its own means anymore, so was dependent. This ma vulnerable for blackmailing and hoping to buy itself out of the need to confront the "barbars" moving in. But in the end, while having bought some time in between, it nevertheless got eaten.
This compares very well to the EU'S own megalomania. Like Rome, the EU collapses under itws own weight, while having lost vital skills of sovereign survival, and suffering from unwillingness to "shorten its frontlines" (and claims) and to break its inherent reform deadlock.
Skybird
01-30-17, 07:20 PM
There is a long standing tradition of former presidents not criticizing their successor.
Few people are as critical about Bush than I am, but I have to acknowledge that Bush refrained from breaking this tradition.
Obama on the other hand. :nope:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/obama-donald-trump-travel-ban-statement/index.html
I fear this may not be the last.
Yes technically he is just an ordinary citizen with the right of expression, but there is a reason why this tradition is in place.
I don't think what he is doing is right, even if I agree with him on this issue.
You think Trump would honour this tradition?
Obama may act by the thought that desperate times need desperate measures. Whether his assessment of "desperate" is valid or not, is open for discussion.
Also, considering how much racist slurs and mud was thrown at him when he still was in office, Obama showed exemplary contenance and self-restraint.
However, the derogatory terms of the left: homophobe, islamophobe, xenophobe, neo-con, racist, etc,
Don't forget "alt-right". I'd never even heard of the term before the left told me that it was a vast right wing conspiracy and accused me of being a card carrying member of it.
So, Gregg Phillips, Mr '3 million fake votes'...is one of those people who Trump says that "When you look at the people that are registered, dead, illegal and two states, and some cases maybe three states, we have a lot to look into."
https://apnews.com/80497cfb5f054c9b8c9e0f8f5ca30a62
Meanwhile in Muslim ban land, hundreds of US diplomats have drafted a 'dissent cable' to protest the order, the response from the administration was to 'Get with the program or go', so I imagine there'll be another load of empty spaces in the Trump government soon. Most likely another empty space will be the acting attorney-generals position since she's not going to defend the order so no doubt Trump will kick her out.
It's all quite amusing really, at least you guys are keeping us entertained with your zany politics.
http://i.imgur.com/DKJhx9l.gif
Just try not to bomb us or something, ok? :salute:
Don't forget "alt-right". I'd never even heard of the term before the left told me that it was a vast right wing conspiracy and accused me of being a card carrying member of it.
Bah, you're not Alt-right, you're Old-right. Alt-right people are the likes of Richard Spencer, and to some extent Bannon, in so much that they take the traditional conservative movement, but also put the whole superiority complex in it.
The Alt-right are a bit like the 'snowflake' group that you point out, and often people who try to be a bit more in the middle get grouped in with them just because they're a bit left or a bit right. It just seems to be the way things are right now, there's no-one who even wants to meet in the middle. Neither side is going to be happy until the other side is crushed.
So here we are...war.
Torvald Von Mansee
01-30-17, 08:40 PM
Oh, you mean like how the left calls people racist if they don't agree with the lefts point of view
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Xv7I8W21XaM/UwnpUTcgYuI/AAAAAAAAAjA/pqrEfMLwjoI/s1600/straw+man.jpg
Torvald Von Mansee
01-30-17, 08:43 PM
It's all quite amusing really, at least you guys are keeping us entertained with your zany politics.
http://i.imgur.com/DKJhx9l.gif
Just try not to bomb us or something, ok? :salute:
You know this idiocy is going to have a ripple affect, don't you?
You know this idiocy is going to have a ripple affect, don't you?
Eyup, nothing we can do about it though, sadly. Just have to ride this out and hope that things get better. Or at the very least that our deaths are quick and painless. :yep:
Jeff-Groves
01-30-17, 09:22 PM
Time for Monday Night Rehabilitation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLts-sXlLEM
I'll leave to you Guys to figure out who is who.
Buddahaid
01-30-17, 09:28 PM
Great movie and sadly getting truer by the year.:shucks:
Skybird
01-31-17, 06:14 AM
At this pace by which Trump raises civil and institutional, now even economic resistance and enemies to his policies and himself, he cannot hold out 4 years. I cannot see how this could be.
He tries to win the match by 1. Pe4, 2. Qh5, 3. Qxf7+. He does not even care to play 3. Bc4 first. That's not it. Really, this way means no way.
Think of the goals of his policies what you want - the way he tries to enforce them is stupid, simply stupid. Maximum damage and winning as many enemies as possible in as shortest time as possible seem to be his priorities.
This is one of the finest textbook illustrations of pathological narcissism I have ever seen or heard of. It borders or oversteps the line to psychopathy/sociopathy - the absence of any own ability to realise that there are others different from oneself and with an inner life of their own.
What I say is: I think he is psychologically totally defunct, and ill.
One mjst seriously put into question if Britain is well-advised to put its post-Brexit-bets on such an untrustworthy "ally". I tell you, he gives #### for "special relations". This is not Ronnie and Maggie riding together into the sunset. Trump first - even if that would mean the sinking of Britain below waterlevel.
He tries to win the match by 1. Pe4, 2. Qh5, 3. Qxf7+. He does not even care to play 3. Bc4 first. That's not it. Really, this way means no way.
http://i.imgur.com/xzHcq6U.jpg
Catfish
01-31-17, 06:32 AM
Trump has just fired his Attorney General for defying him, and calls her a "traitor".
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/trump-immigration-ban-memo.html?_r=0
Have the heads of the various departments to obey him despite better knowledge, or if instructed to violate the constitution.. i mean can he really rule with decrees, without consulting anyone? :hmmm:
The newspapers here are full of all kinds of alleged violations against the US constitution, however those are european papers.. Nigel Farage of course supports the US president firing all staff.. i wonder.. ah whatever (*grabs popcorn*)
Skybird
01-31-17, 06:44 AM
http://i.imgur.com/xzHcq6U.jpg
Thats the Finnish way. All others use Wikipedia :D
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholar%27s_mate
:O:
Nippelspanner
01-31-17, 06:49 AM
He tries to win the match by 1. Pe4, 2. Qh5, 3. Qxf7+. He does not even care to play 3. Bc4 first.
Trump aside for a moment.
I think you did it. You found the most blatant, stinking and desperate way of trying to sound oh-so-smart and sophisticated. Ugh.
Trump will get the full 8 years, because he is able to easily blind his followers with the most ridiculous bs. Just read this topic.
"No way this will happen!" kinda lost its value in my book. Everyone said no way he will become the Republicans choice. Then everybody said he will no way become POTUS. Now everyone's saying no way he'll make it past the first 4 years.
I say he will. Because those who support him are too easily fooled with even the most blatantly patriotic catchphrases and afterwards too proud to ever admit being wrong - so let's vote him again because freedom, or something like that.
Jimbuna
01-31-17, 06:59 AM
Apologies for stating the obvious but if Trump is going to surround himself with 'Yes' people he is obviously prepared to take the risk that said advice from those he appoints may be of less value and use.
Skybird
01-31-17, 08:14 AM
Trump aside for a moment.
I think you did it. You found the most blatant, stinking and desperate way of trying to sound oh-so-smart and sophisticated. Ugh.
Trump will get the full 8 years, because he is able to easily blind his followers with the most ridiculous bs. Just read this topic.
"No way this will happen!" kinda lost its value in my book. Everyone said no way he will become the Republicans choice. Then everybody said he will no way become POTUS. Now everyone's saying no way he'll make it past the first 4 years.
I say he will. Because those who support him are too easily fooled with even the most blatantly patriotic catchphrases and afterwards too proud to ever admit being wrong - so let's vote him again because freedom, or something like that.
My memory holds it that I think I was the first saying in clear words that - back then - now Trump seems to be the most likely Republican candidate. And I think I also was the first, at least one of the very first, who again used blatant open words to say that Trump is set to become president.
I also recently said that many black swan events have caught the Europeans and especially the Germans completely unprepared, Trump being one of these black swans (Brexit, Ukraine, Syria being other examples).
I also argued in the past that Trump will run office like an elephant in a china shop, and I did not rule out that he could survive for the full four years.
But I think he is overdoing it. When one cretaes oneself so many enemies and so fast, even own institutions one depends on to carry out one's own policies, then this proportionally reduces the chances that one could hold out. Viele Hunde sind des Hasen Tod. If ministries and federal offices simply switch to civil disobedience and boycott, then even Trump can no longer move on. He can fire staff and have one generaiton coming in and having it getting the boot two weeks later - it does not help. Bureaucracy is the prime tool for every dictatorship. If it cannot base on and trust in its bureaucracy, and if the bureaucracy works against the regime, in the hidden, this is the death sentence even for the regime.
Trump even pisses those institutions he depends on, not so much only by his goals, but by the rude way he wants to get his way. And that will break him his neck sooner or later, if he does not change this.
It will even become worse when the bill for his economic highflying debt-raising frenzy will be presented, and when his voters realise that in the long run they once again have been left behind. The great disillusionment. Then at the latest the curtain will fall for him.
Without messing around with election laws like Putin does, Trump will not win an election again like he did this time. This already now I say is certain. I do not need a full four years to see that. Some reason, and insight into how economy and its variables function, is enough.
You do not like my statement? Well, its describing the better of all the worse scenarios. If I am wrong and he even gets a second term - then you know that everything is lost and gone indeed.
That Trump is there now, can be explained. But it should not be excused.
Skybird
01-31-17, 08:23 AM
Bannon gets permanent seat in the NSC, director of intelligence and military chief-of-staff loosing them.
Competence and experience out, propaganda in.
This will hurt big time.
Nippelspanner
01-31-17, 08:26 AM
You do not like my statement? Well, its describing the better of all the worse scenarios. If I am wrong and he even gets a second term - then you know that everything is lost and gone indeed.
That Trump is there now, can be explained. But it should not be excused.
I even agree with it. The statement wasn't why I snapped, it was the delivery.
But yes, explained yet not excused, that's the nails head right there.
Trump has just fired his Attorney General for defying him, and calls her a "traitor".
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/trump-immigration-ban-memo.html?_r=0
Have the heads of the various departments to obey him despite better knowledge, or if instructed to violate the constitution.. i mean can he really rule with decrees, without consulting anyone? :hmmm:
The newspapers here are full of all kinds of alleged violations against the US constitution, however those are european papers.. Nigel Farage of course supports the US president firing all staff.. i wonder.. ah whatever (*grabs popcorn*) The executive order temporarily banning entry from specified Muslim-majority countries is both well within President Trump’s constitutional authority and consistent with statutory law. When it comes to national security the judicial system in this country tends to side with the President.
FYI: the position of Attorney General is considered an "at will" position, which means they can be fired or resign at any time for any reason.
IMO Trump was right in firing her, Yates publicly stated she wasn't going to do her job. When she did that, she should have resigned, Trump had no choice but to fire her.
AVGWarhawk
01-31-17, 09:30 AM
IMO Trump was right in firing her, Yates publicly stated she wasn't going to do her job. When she did that, she should have resigned, Trump had no choice but to fire her.
It sets a precedence.
AVGWarhawk
01-31-17, 09:33 AM
Apologies for stating the obvious but if Trump is going to surround himself with 'Yes' people he is obviously prepared to take the risk that said advice from those he appoints may be of less value and use.
It is not always a matter of yes people. In this case of the AG firing, the individual fired appeared openly defiant and taking a stance on "feelings". The stance did not appear to be based on actual law and what is written in the Constitution.
Mr Quatro
01-31-17, 10:00 AM
Good news it's not too late for some of you complainers:https://www.yahoo.com/style/canadian-prime-minister-justin-trudeau-182109217.html
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tweeted in solidarity with refugees, sending a message to those affected by the ban to let them know that there are still countries welcoming them with open arms.
"To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith," he wrote. "Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada"
Catfish
01-31-17, 10:22 AM
[...]When it comes to national security the judicial system in this country tends to side with the President.
FYI: the position of Attorney General is considered an "at will" position, which means they can be fired or resign at any time for any reason. [...0
Thanks for clearing that up. :)
Jimbuna
01-31-17, 10:23 AM
It is not always a matter of yes people. In this case of the AG firing, the individual fired appeared openly defiant and taking a stance on "feelings". The stance did not appear to be based on actual law and what is written in the Constitution.
Rgr that but I was thinking in terms of the beginning of a slippery slope sort of.
I say he will. Because those who support him are too easily fooled with even the most blatantly patriotic catchphrases and afterwards too proud to ever admit being wrong - so let's vote him again because freedom, or something like that.
Good thing that we have you to lecture us on our Provincial American failings. Because you know:
http://www.funniestmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Funniest_Memes_i-m-so-patriotic-i-piss-red-white-and-blue_11525.jpeg
Skybird
01-31-17, 10:58 AM
Its not about the legality of Trump'S firing of the state attorney. He has any right to fire her, and honestly said - if I were in his seat and my just called in state attorney falls into my back and calls a ministry to boycott me, I would immediately fire that person, too.
What it is about however is that Trump is so rude and stupid to stampede around not like one but like a whole herd of elephants, in a fashion that raises resistance and hostility in spectacular ammounts and no time, almost necessarily. You can have the law on your side, and still be wrong. At least acting stupid while the law is on your side. His problem is that he bahves and decides in a way where he ends up needing to fire his people and sees his institutions he needs to support him, opposing him instead. Its not the What - its the How where he failed. And I think it will be not the last incident of this kind, nor has it been the first.
I do not necessarily disagree with some of Trump's goals. I do not oppose the wall against Mexican mass migration. I also do not oppose in principle to ban relations with and travel/trade from and to certain countries, on the basis of hostile ideologies. I have called for that myself in the past. However, i would understand that the way in which I impose these sanctions, need careful preparation of the public as well as of the institutions, and that I am ill-advised to enforce this against the majority's will with an iron fist, just because I have some paragraphs on my side. At least as long as I do not will to accept my rule bein a full-blown police state and dictatorship, with military on the street and secret police silencing my critics.
But as any sociopath, Trump finds it difficult to see that there is other life on this planet which may not fall in its appropriate place he has forseen for it. For sociopaths, other people simply are things they can handle and arrange at their will, without scruples, and without any serious expectation that they could resist or fight back, because they are just - things. Like you handle your book and rip it apart or lay it down or treat it well or throw it around wiothout bad conscience - its just a thing, and your belonging. It got to have no will of its own.
This way of policy-enforcing onto the American public could lead America to breaking point. And there is a certain chance that it could even blow it apart, if all and everything goes wrong.
Another problem with the ban from certain countries is that Trump is incvonsistent there, he allows travelling still from several known terrorist Muslim states. He contradicts himself there, seriously damaging his credibility. Delicously - it are countries where Trump has own business interests. To say he protects these interests probably is alternative fact and Trumpophobia only.
AVGWarhawk
01-31-17, 11:14 AM
Rgr that but I was thinking in terms of the beginning of a slippery slope sort of.
I had to let it sink in. Yes, your are correct, some will simply become yes men. It is a slipper slope and mixed message.
It sets a precedence. Not really, it's happened a few times, Mostly these things play out behind the scenes and the effected party "resigns". John Adams fired Timothy Pickering as Secretary of State in 1800. In 1981 Reagan fired 11,000 air traffic controllers.
AVGWarhawk
01-31-17, 11:43 AM
Not really, it's happened a few times, Mostly these things play out behind the scenes and the effected party "resigns". John Adams fired Timothy Pickering as Secretary of State in 1800. In 1981 Reagan fired 11,000 air traffic controllers.
I meant in a sense that it set the precedence for Trump. He has shown his position when these things occur. But Jim pointed out it is a precedence that may create "yes men".
Rgr that but I was thinking in terms of the beginning of a slippery slope sort of.not really there are safeguards built into the system. However it does set the tone for the Administration, President Trump is pretty much putting everyone that works for the Administration on notice to start being productive or step aside.
I meant in a sense that it set the precedence for Trump. He has shown his position when these things occur. But Jim pointed out it is a precedence that may create "yes men". I don't think Trump got to be where he is by being surrounded by "yes men". I think though, he will expect any dissent to be dealt with privately, and he will require results.
Here's part of the latest EO on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs:
Sec. 2. Regulatory Cap for Fiscal Year 2017. (a) Unless prohibited by law, whenever an executive department or agency (agency) publicly proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates a new regulation, it shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed.
(b) For fiscal year 2017, which is in progress, the heads of all agencies are directed that the total incremental cost of all new regulations, including repealed regulations, to be finalized this year shall be no greater than zero, unless otherwise required by law or consistent with advice provided in writing by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (Director).
AVGWarhawk
01-31-17, 12:16 PM
I don't think Trump got to be where he is by being surrounded by "yes men". I think though, he will expect any dissent to be dealt with privately, and he will require results.
Here's part of the latest EO on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs:
Key word here is privately. The AG was all about getting her position in the news.
Trump is result driven no doubt.
Well, welcome to the world of law and order,,, something that has been missing for almost a decade,,.. I do enjoy the flailing of the Soros funded media,, if the law is on the books and was passed by congress ,, signed by a past President ,, and President Trump enforces it,, how is it unconstitutional ???
Bilge_Rat
01-31-17, 01:48 PM
I know no one here has any interest in the facts, but this is the press conference John Kelly, head of DHS just gave. A bit long, but definitely worth the look:
https://youtu.be/DPF7sHHVa2w
among the highlights:
-Kelly fully supports the EO;
-DHS helped draft the EO and they knew it was coming;
-the reason those 7 countries were chosen is because they lack the most basic types of records, so it is very difficult to check out the background of an individual;
-the plan is to develop additional forms of "vetting" with those countries over the next 30,60,90,120 days;
Kelly is very impressive, obviously not a "yes" man and seems a good choice to head DHS.
AndyJWest
01-31-17, 02:36 PM
"welcome to the world of law and order" indeed:
The White House has said a five-year-old boy was detained for more than four hours and reportedly handcuffed at an airport because he posed a “security risk”.
The boy, reportedly a US citizen with an Iranian mother, was one of more than 100 people detained following President Donald Trump’s immigration order.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/white-house-five-year-old-boy-detained-dulles-international-airport-hours-sean-spicer-pose-security-a7554521.html?cmpid=facebook-post
Soros funded media
"One of the principle reasons for the legislation in America is the necessity to combat terrorism. This legislation is not anti-Islam but pro-American. The rights of Americans are thereby to be protected against destructive Liberalist influences."
"The ignorance of the broad masses about the inner nature of the liberal, the lack of instinct and narrow-mindedness of our upper classes, make the people an easy victim for this Liberal campaign of lies."
"welcome to the world of law and order" indeed:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/white-house-five-year-old-boy-detained-dulles-international-airport-hours-sean-spicer-pose-security-a7554521.html?cmpid=facebook-post
Not to mention, of course, the highly successful first military action of President Trump in Yemen. One dead Seal, one dead Osprey, one dead eight year old American girl and several dead Yemenese women. :dead:
"welcome to the world of law and order" indeed:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/white-house-five-year-old-boy-detained-dulles-international-airport-hours-sean-spicer-pose-security-a7554521.html?cmpid=facebook-post
Well I remember standing in line at the airport watching Obama's TSA humiliate a 85 year old white women in a wheel chair,, and there is alot more examples of TSA abuse,, you care to continue.
https://www.theadvocates.org/ex-tsa-agent-laughed-abused-american-citizens/
Not to mention, of course, the highly successful first military action of President Trump in Yemen. One dead Seal, one dead Osprey, one dead eight year old American girl and several dead Yemenese women. :dead:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article124842824.html
The U.S. dropped 26,171 bombs last year, 3,027 more than 2015. I think that goat cart is well atomized.
AndyJWest
01-31-17, 03:08 PM
Well I remember standing in line at the airport watching Obama's TSA humiliate a 85 year old white women in a wheel chair,, and there is alot more examples of TSA abuse,, you care to continue.
Would it have been o.k. if she hadn't been white? If not, why is this even relevant?
Bilge_Rat
01-31-17, 03:16 PM
yup, "law and order"...
..Trump supporter attacked, almost killed by "peaceful protesters"..:yep:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4175576/Trump-supporter-knocked-airport-protest.html
AVGWarhawk
01-31-17, 03:16 PM
"welcome to the world of law and order" indeed:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/white-house-five-year-old-boy-detained-dulles-international-airport-hours-sean-spicer-pose-security-a7554521.html?cmpid=facebook-post
NOTHING new here. Kids have been searched by the TSA and detained for just about any reason the TSA can find. Search it. You will find plenty of this long before Trump was even running.
Not to mention, of course, the highly successful first military action of President Trump in Yemen. One dead Seal, one dead Osprey, one dead eight year old American girl and several dead Yemenese women. :dead:that ones going to be difficult to deal with.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3hhXl5WEAExToZ.jpg
Mr Quatro
01-31-17, 04:15 PM
I know no one here has any interest in the facts, but this is the press conference John Kelly, head of DHS just gave. A bit long, but definitely worth the look:
among the highlights:
Kelly is very impressive, obviously not a "yes" man and seems a good choice to head DHS.
You sent a sharp pain into my soul :D ... of course we care about the facts. Keep bringing them up :up: ... don't abandon ship like some of the people have. :yep:
Very good youtube news conference from PBS no less ... not just John Kelly either his staff seems serious about doing their job. These are changing times. Trump said during the election that the ban would be until congress came up with a solution.
Well I remember standing in line at the airport watching Obama's TSA humiliate a 85 year old white women in a wheel chair,, and there is alot more examples of TSA abuse,, you care to continue.
NOTHING new here. Kids have been searched by the TSA and detained for just about any reason the TSA can find. Search it. You will find plenty of this long before Trump was even running.
TSA needs something, uh? They hardly ever get any good press from checking baby diapers and selective nice looking women to letting guns get by them.
AVGWarhawk
01-31-17, 04:27 PM
TSA needs something, uh? They hardly ever get any good press from checking baby diapers and selective nice looking women to letting guns get by them.
My 70 year old father was detained by the TSA because he had 2 Bic lighters in his pockets. He was getting ready to head to Europe on vacation. My father used a cane and look about as much as a terrorist as Kermit the Frog.
Would it have been o.k. if she hadn't been white? If not, why is this even relevant?
Like someone else said she looked as much of a terrorist as Kermit the frog,, you want to make comments about supposed wrong doings, of Trump, you better fact check what the past administration has done .. What do you have against secure borders and the rule of law..???/
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=200&pictureid=9335
AndyJWest
01-31-17, 05:23 PM
Like someone else said she looked as much of a terrorist as Kermit the frog,, you want to make comments about supposed wrong doings, of Trump, you better fact check what the past administration has done .. What do you have against secure borders and the rule of law..???/
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=200&pictureid=9335
So no actual explanation as to why you thought it relevant to describe the woman as white? No surprise there...
So no actual explanation as to why you thought it relevant to describe the woman as white? No surprise there...
Because she was ,, just like you said it was a 5 year old child to make your point,, and now that I've told you probably still won't get it ,, just like I told you that story and you didn't get it because you are rapped up in your ideology and your hate for Trump,, white , black ,, purple she was harmless that's the point maybe it would hit home if it was your mother or grand mother,, so,,why are you so hung up on race ???
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2017/01/these-73-sitting-democrats-voted-to-ban-visas-from-some-muslim-countries-that-law-still-exists
AndyJWest
01-31-17, 05:47 PM
If I told you, you wouldn't get it ,, just like I told you that story and you didn't get it because you are rapped up in your ideology and your hate for Trump,, white , black ,, purple she was harmless that's the point maybe it would hit home if it was your mother or grand mother,, why you so hung up on race
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2017/01/these-73-sitting-democrats-voted-to-ban-visas-from-some-muslim-countries-that-law-still-exists
So still no answer, just your usual illiterate blather. And no it isn't me that is 'hung upon race'. It is you, because it was you that raised the subject, and then refused to explain why you thought it relevant.
I wonder how many are using their common sense or brain when they discuss Trump and US politics and how many is letting their feeling controlling their writing or speaking of the same ?
Markus
So still no answer, just your usual illiterate blather. And no it isn't me that is 'hung upon race'. It is you, because it was you that raised the subject, and then refused to explain why you thought it relevant.
If you are going to quote me use the whole statement so it isn't taken out of context one would think you work for CNN,, why are you so upset that I said she was white,, can't handle the truth that there was wrong doing on your side of the issue that you had to use the race card to deflect the issue to race.. there was also some more wrong doing that involved a WHITE MAN in Oregon, and your precious Obama administration, embrace the dismantling of your fascist police state and you wonder why Trump won,, what part of she was white don't you get.
https://www.rt.com/usa/331221-fbi-coverup-oregon-rancher-death/
AndyJWest
01-31-17, 07:18 PM
Still no explanation. At this point I think we can draw our own conclusions as to why Yubba thinks that someone being white makes them being improperly targeted by the TSA more significant.
Nippelspanner
01-31-17, 07:25 PM
Still no explanation. At this point I think we can draw our own conclusions as to why Yubba thinks that someone being white makes them being improperly targeted by the TSA more significant.
At this point?
You're late to the party!
u crank
01-31-17, 07:37 PM
Still no explanation. At this point I think we can draw our own conclusions as to why Yubba thinks that someone being white makes them being improperly targeted by the TSA more significant.
I think you are making too big a deal about this. Why?
AndyJWest
01-31-17, 07:38 PM
At this point?
You're late to the party!
Sorry, I'm late, I was detained going through immigration. They probably knew more about my background than I'd hoped. :03:
I think you are making too big a deal about this. Why?
Well it's pretty obvious that he doesn't like Yubba.
u crank
01-31-17, 08:40 PM
C'est la guerre.
You know what they say about petting a burning dog. :03:
You know what they say about petting a burning dog. :03:
Use oven gloves? :)
So...Gorsuch...the surprise announcement that thanks to twitter wasn't a surprise. :haha:
Once the Democrat blockade has been passed (because they will block this, because that's just how it is now, don't expect bi-partisanship anymore, that's dead). He seems a bit confused on the idea of the separation of church and state, but there's a lot of that going around at the moment. I can see Roe vs Wade being taken out back and shot, and that's really not going to help matters much. But he's got a sound mind on term limits, and I think that if there was any bipartisanship left to be had, that might be where it could be sought...but there isn't, so it won't.
So...how long do you think it'll take to get him appointed? I'm thinking a month at least. :yep:
Still no explanation. At this point I think we can draw our own conclusions as to why Yubba thinks that someone being white makes them being improperly targeted by the TSA more significant.
oohh is that your conclusion really,, apparently a 80 year old white woman in a wheel chair ,, life, civil rights and dignity doesn't matter to you,, what they did was totally inappropriate and made me about sick to watch,, you want to read something into it because I said white,, is because you got nothin but ridicule and you wonder why Trump won,, your utophia was nothing more than a fascist police state.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO4iIjKNraw
AndyJWest
01-31-17, 09:33 PM
Learn to read.
Onkel Neal
01-31-17, 10:04 PM
You know what they say about petting a burning dog. :03:
Soon you'll need a new dog?:haha:
Learn to read.
More insults,, I guess the law doesn't matter to you either,, because you can't abide to the simple rules of this forum,, and you wonder why Trump won ,plus you could only come up with one event while there is 100s if not 1000s of instances of TSA abusing their authority under the Obama administration, obey the Law.
Rockstar
01-31-17, 10:26 PM
Trump has just fired his Attorney General for defying him, and calls her a "traitor".
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/trump-immigration-ban-memo.html?_r=0
Have the heads of the various departments to obey him despite better knowledge, or if instructed to violate the constitution.. i mean can he really rule with decrees, without consulting anyone? :hmmm:
The newspapers here are full of all kinds of alleged violations against the US constitution, however those are european papers.. Nigel Farage of course supports the US president firing all staff.. i wonder.. ah whatever (*grabs popcorn*)
The Attorney General is not voted into office but is an employee in the executive branch of government who is chosen and appointed by the chief executuve (the president) and serves soley at his or her good pleasure.
AndyJWest
01-31-17, 10:56 PM
Meanwhile another liberal attack on Trump's travel ban:
Donald Trump's US travel ban on people from seven mainly Muslim countries could become a "propaganda opportunity" for so-called Islamic State, the UK's home secretary has warned.
Amber Rudd called the president's move "divisive" and "wrong".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38814346
Except of course that Rudd is a senior member of the ruling Conservative party. And the PM has backed her up, needless to say. Not often I'm in agreement with them, but this seems entirely cogent, and to the point.
It's a public relations disaster alright, but that's exactly what this presidency was designed to be from the onset. So, you know, that's how it's going to be...and PM May is probably going to realise that she's hitched her wagon to a toxic personality...but, well, Brexit is gonna Brexit and we need the cash so Erdo, Trump, it doesn't matter who we need to suck up to, we'll do it for the dollar dollar. :03:
Kptlt. Neuerburg
02-01-17, 12:11 AM
https://s6.postimg.org/h8gdqwurl/C2x_Zv_LJXUAAFXlq.jpg
Just a gut feeling, but we're probably going to see a lot more "alterative facts" in the coming months and years.
Buddahaid
02-01-17, 01:53 AM
https://s6.postimg.org/h8gdqwurl/C2x_Zv_LJXUAAFXlq.jpg
Just a gut feeling, but we're probably going to see a lot more "alterative facts" in the coming months and years.
To be fair, that applies to the greater everyone with a horse in the race. I don't like Donald Trump, I never have, and I see no need to like him simply because he's the President.
I respect the office of the President, but that doesn't mean I need to respect the man who is President. Donald Trump doesn't care about being respected, apparently, and he doesn't need to be. So be it.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.