This. If you're not aware that this is what happens @Dumat12 , it's worth reading up on. Same thing with the likes of clerical child abuse scandals - the first brave person opens the floodgates.
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
This. If you're not aware that this is what happens @Dumat12 , it's worth reading up on. Same thing with the likes of clerical child abuse scandals - the first brave person opens the floodgates.
Someone who claims to be proud of genocidal massacres of different races based solely on your common racial bond loses any credibility to state "not racist in any way".
He's seeking to limit immigration solely on race and nationality and deport peoples based on race. That's obviously a racist biggot to anyone with half a brain. I'm sure you think otherwise though.
What generalised criticism, ie racial discrimination, would you like to make about these ethnic groups specifically?
Similar thing happened with Billy Cosby and his accusers. One or two came forward, at which point the rest of them gained the courage to speak out.
It's a shame but it happens a lot.
Now I might be wrong, but is everyone in the states pronouncing Antifa wrong??
Anti-Fascism... Surely the stress should be on the FA? On videos from Europe I've seen, that's how it's pronounced.
Congrats. Me neither. Doesn't mean that other people don't do it.
Possible. Any information about what happened with these women since I'm not really aware. Is Trump being sued by these women?
You're projecting here. When have I ever said I'm 'proud' of any massacres, genocidal or otherwise?
ILLEGAL immigrants. Laws are there to be followed, not your feelings. For some reason you liberals just have a hard time grasping this concept.
Just one - a nation has a duty of taking care for the needs of its own citizens first before the needs of the many.
So not often then. And it's no justification.
All those illegals, for example, who have now won the right to reapply for the visas they were denied because of being muslim?
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...er-first-Muslim-ban-can-now-reapply-for-visas
You clearly stated you were 'proud' of white colonisation earlier in this thread, which ofcourse included massacres/genocide. Ofcoure you're only basis for being 'proud' is on the basis of being white.
You're oversimplyfying because your argument is none existan t. Visitors/tourists from Muslim counties aren't 'illegal'. Foreigners from the most Islamically terrorist countries aren't barred either because they're financially and politically significant. You have no valid argument for this discrimination.
Children born from immigrants haven't commited any crime either.
Yet it ignores the needs of it's poor and middle classes and those people don't benefit in anyway from this discrimination
Yep, i still remember when he said McCain was a coward for being jailed by Vietcongs.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/trump-attacks-mccain-i-like-people-who-werent-captured-120317
Didn't the Supreme Court overrule Trump's Muslim ban? I have no idea what this has to do with anything.
You're quite clearly misinformed. I said I was proud of my heritage and I have no reason to feel ashamed by it. For colonization all I said that I believe the ends justify the means (in Africa's case). Yes, there were numerous atrocities committed in the colonies, but I also do believe that the colonization period propelled Africa technologically by thousands of years. Whether you believe that the suffering the Africans had to endure during that time was worth having access to modern day infrastructure, medicine, economy, government system, society structure, etc depends entirely on your perspective of things. Also, I said that I have no reason to feel any guilt over what any European did anywhere in the world at all because those are the times these people lived in - cruel and unforgiving and a person had to do everything to get by and a nation had to conquer in order to survive.
Why should I feel ashamed of that? Were the whites the only one to do it? Slavery, wars, deaths, massacres, exploitation. Were the Europeans the only ones that did this for me to feel ashamed? As far as I know every single race in existence whether it be asian, white, black did it. Why should whites be the only ones ashamed by it? Why is saying that you're proud of your heritage as a white guy equivalent to racism, but saying that you're proud as a black or an asian suddenly admirable? (and I have no problems with blacks and asians feeling proud of their history, in fact I'm all for it).
Furthermore being proud of my heritage runs far deeper than the color of my skin, that's just so ignorant.
I do have one, actually. The ban was targeted against the refugees who were coming in mass droves (thousands upon thousands of people). The purpose of the ban was to limit immigration (because let's face it, it's not like Europeans are coming in droves to America) and prevent random terrorists from sneaking in.
No, they have not, but their parents did. Say the child of Pablo Escobar who killed numerous people and brought great havoc and destruction upon Columbia, should he inherit his father's money? Breaking the law is breaking the law, and the child benefits from this. Also, I doubt it would be better for the child to be taken away from his parents.
It's exactly the middle class and poor class that BENEFITS from this 'discrimination' because the illegal immigration HURTS them and not the wealthy who actually PROFIT from it.
It was overruled, but not before legal travellers were turned away, and indeed border control guards took the law into their own hands on a number of reported occasions even after the 9th Circuit Court ruling.
Oh wow.
You are utterly misinformed, and likely projecting again here. Where to even begin with everything that's totally wrong in this paragraph. Seriously, there's not one accurate statement here, in fact the opposite is the truth for almost everything you've said here.
Feck sake! What a disgusting comparison. You're talking about people living and working and paying tax and contributing to the US.
Back in reality.... check out this weirdness
And? What's your point here exactly?
Well, of course you won't have any response. The only way you holier-than-thou people seem to respond to any argument is calling the other person a racist or how appalled you are by the 'bigotry' of a comment. Like a broken clock.
I'm not projecting at all, that was what the ban was for - to limit the refugee immigration and prevent terrorists from sneaking in.
They are breaking the law, whether that hurts your feelings or not. The child profits from it, whether he is guilty or not. I'm not comparing illegal immigrants to Pablo Escobar, I'm comparing their child situation to that of Pablo's son. Furthermore I don't blame refugees or Mexican immigrants for seeking a better life, it's not their fault that they were born in the country they were born in, but that doesn't mean the United States or any country in the world has an obligation to take them in.
Clearly, my point is that non-illegal travellers and immigrants were stopped and that the action of the ban was not to stop illegal immigration as you said.
HA!! As someone from a former colony, I'd take not being so technologically advanced over my ancestors being massacred for 700 years, thank you very much. But I suppose in your eyes, it's ok that the former colonies resources have been pillaged, their lands poisoned and their people murdered and enslaved for hundreds of years so that they can have smartphones nowadays to go with their crippling poverty.
Answer me this then - how many refugees has the States taken in recently? And how many illegal Europeans are there at present?
You're comparing people who pay tax to a famous murdering druglord. Why not take an example much simpler than that, instead of a famous grand criminal? What you're trying to infer is painfully clear.
What an absolute turd of a comparison. Surely you can come up with a better, more realistic comparison than using that in settling for the "one is illegal, so is the other, so why accept one and not the other" line of reasoning.
Here's some light reading to help you with one of my questions:
https://qz.com/894439/how-many-refugees-has-the-us-taken-in-from-syria/
https://qz.com/894439/how-many-refugees-has-the-us-taken-in-from-syria/
"Me and my family are safe; my kids go to school; we can now live a normal life. I suffered back home, but I have my rights now. I'm a human."
Not really familiar with this case, but the guy sounds like a refugee to me, so I don't get it? The ban was meant against the mass immigration of refugees and quite obviously lots of good people were affected by that.
Sorry, but I never once said that colonization was good everywhere. In the cases of Native Americans and Indians it was an extremely bad thing and fecked the population there immensely, I was talking specifically about Africa. And no, it's not ok per se, but you're using present day morals onto people that lived hundreds of years ago. If you know anything about history, you would know that the things Europeans practiced back then were practiced by literally everyone, with no exception.
What does this have to do with anything? I said what the ban was for, there is also a reason why he didn't ban every Muslim country, but only the ones that were torn apart form war. So it's not a ban targeting Muslims because if it was he would have banned every single Muslim country ot there, wouldn't he?
What the hell do you want me to compare it with? The child gets the benefits of the person that broke the law. That's it. There is nothing left to say. Illegal immigration is illegal, there's nothing scientific about it.
Both are illegal and shouldn't be accepted. The severity of it doesn't really matter since the child of Escobar was completely innocent, also. Laws are there to be followed and enforced if need be, it doesn't matter if I sympathize with the immigrants and their plight.
.......... but it wasn't. Trump and his team called it a Muslim Ban. Do you dispute this?
And to this I say, who gives a feck if everyone did it back then. Your point was that wholesale slaughter and enslavement of them and the pillaging of their natural resources is ok because they are POSSIBLY more technologically advanced than they would have been if Europeans hadn't done that (and all that entails such as the resources being kept by them). And I say, I'd rather not be slaughtered thanks.
What this has to do with it is... and stick with me here... the US is not taking in hundreds of thousands of these refugees you're talking about. Other countries are. Is Iran torn apart by war? And on whether it's a Muslim ban or not - I'm using Trump's own words, and the words that the justices zoned in on in the 9th Circuit Court ruling. You're once again wilfully misinformed.
How about starting with a crime that doesn't involve being responsible for the deaths of thousands of people? That'd be a start.
Last edited:
Trump makes a deal on DACA over some Chinese food with a couple of Dems and now all of a sudden he's not racist. I'd hate to see what happens to his approval ratings after a dinner of Korean barbecue with Bernie and Warren.
By the way, there are at least 50,000 illegal Irish in the US. Should Trump ban all travellers from here?
Kremlin Dana at it again....
Always known it the way you'd pronounce it, in British anarchist circles. No idea how the American groups prefer it.
feck sake, when is this investigation going to heat up again?
Forgive me if I misunderstand you, but English isn't my first language. But you're saying "the ends justifies the means" in Africas case? What end? Justifies it for whom? The africans at the time who suffered countless mass genocides and enslavement of millions?
I mean, you make it sound like they should almost feel grateful that the europeans were kind enough to stop by.
Btw, where are you from? I mean, considering that you're so proud of your heritage? I'm from Denmark, and I don't know anyone that would consider themselves "proud" of that. Grateful more like.
Mueller?
It has actually, there's just been so much else going on... as per the norm. And of course the nature of the course the investigation took meant news from it would dry up for long stretches of time.
It was always going to extend well into 2018 before any concrete payback, and even that timeframe is optimistic.
just strange, pretty much gives her a handshake... "well done love, you done your job" and then proceeds to direct her off the bloody stage, she looks dumbfounded
He doesn't believe in that
He's probably happy she's letting him touch her hand again
just strange, pretty much gives her a handshake... "well done love, you done your job" and then proceeds to direct her off the bloody stage, she looks dumbfounded
He pushes her off stage
It’s Now Dawned on Trump: People Hate Him
His wife must hate him
Dumat doesn't? It's a historical fact.
Last edited:
Trump's is certainly by the sounds of it, is getting a pounding from his loyal support over the Dreamers, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/15/16315242/trump-voters-breitbart and according to Gallup daily poll, his approval dipped to 34% a couple of days ago, rebounded to 37% which i guess is still par for the course but dealing with the Dems is a big no no for many.
Back on topic.....California making a bill requiring POTUS candidates to reveal their taxes.
#AMURICAFURST
They have before though.
They have also suspended their own employees for far less - Linda Cohn for example, who was suspended for wondering whether ESPN becoming political is affecting their subscription numbers.
Also, Hill has a history of making bone headed tweets so its not entirely her first offense.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexre...-political-tweet-about-the-orlando-shootings/
You're right. All this just points to ESPN doing it on a case by case basis. SO they're well within their rights to let things go and fire later after another misstep or suspending on first offence. They can do whatever they want and so saying they should fire her isn't something they have to do.
- Status