The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
well this is just sad....

Suspect in Olathe shooting allegedly told bartender he killed two Middle Eastern men

At least one witness reportedly heard the suspect yell “get out of my country” shortly before shooting men he thought were Middle Eastern. Both men, engineers at Garmin, appear to be originally from India.

In an email to employees, Garmin officials identified the fatal victim as employee Srinivas Kuchibhotla. Alok Madasani was injured, the email said.

“Unfortunately, two associates on our Aviation Systems Engineering team, Srinivas Kuchibhotla and Alok Madasani, were shot. We are devastated to inform you that Srinivas passed away and Alok is currently recovering in the hospital,” Garmin said in the email.

In a public statement, Garmin said, “We’re saddened that two Garmin associates were involved in last night’s incident, and we express our condolences to the family and friends of our co-workers involved. Garmin will have grievance counselors on-site and available for its associates today and tomorrow.”

Kuchibhotla posted on LinkedIn in 2014 that he managed helicopter programs. He had a master’s degree in electrical and electronics engineering from the University of Texas at El Paso. He earned his bachelor’s degree at the Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University in India.

A 2014 post on LinkedIn said Madasani was an aviation program coordinator manager at Garmin. He studied at the University of Missouri-Kansas City and at Vasavi College of Engineering in India.


Full Article: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article134459444.html
 
Neutral said:
the doublespeak continues

Click to expand...


To be fair I think the notion is logistically impossible. It's fecking hard to find illegals and when you do, you move them out asap. It'll be business as usual and the number of deportations will depend on manpower and will.
 
Neutral said:
well this is just sad....

Suspect in Olathe shooting allegedly told bartender he killed two Middle Eastern men

At least one witness reportedly heard the suspect yell “get out of my country” shortly before shooting men he thought were Middle Eastern. Both men, engineers at Garmin, appear to be originally from India.

In an email to employees, Garmin officials identified the fatal victim as employee Srinivas Kuchibhotla. Alok Madasani was injured, the email said.

“Unfortunately, two associates on our Aviation Systems Engineering team, Srinivas Kuchibhotla and Alok Madasani, were shot. We are devastated to inform you that Srinivas passed away and Alok is currently recovering in the hospital,” Garmin said in the email.

In a public statement, Garmin said, “We’re saddened that two Garmin associates were involved in last night’s incident, and we express our condolences to the family and friends of our co-workers involved. Garmin will have grievance counselors on-site and available for its associates today and tomorrow.”

Kuchibhotla posted on LinkedIn in 2014 that he managed helicopter programs. He had a master’s degree in electrical and electronics engineering from the University of Texas at El Paso. He earned his bachelor’s degree at the Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University in India.

A 2014 post on LinkedIn said Madasani was an aviation program coordinator manager at Garmin. He studied at the University of Missouri-Kansas City and at Vasavi College of Engineering in India.


Full Article: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article134459444.html
Click to expand...

Sad, stupid arseholes. Too bad even a life sentence isn't justice in this instance.
 
Red Viking said:
For those interested in watching democracy in process then this video is good. It contains the republican senator Tom Cotton being absolutely roasted by an woman and the crowd in Arkansans:

Watch from 20.20 and you can see the woman do an absolutely great job at forcing him to answer her question. People really are waking up regarding the importance of the Affordable Care Act and the republican rhetoric have fallen short recently. Tom tried to continue on to try avoid answering her but the crowd were having non of his behaviour. The woman deserve praise for her knowledge and persistence. If anyone says wait and see what they do before acting then you would see the ACA go poof and no coverage for millions of people as a result. The fight back from the ordinary people will make a massive difference unless the republican party wants to commit political suicide.
Click to expand...


That woman was brilliant
 
roseguy64 said:
Click to expand...

Fake news:
No joking, this is similar to what the Russians did with fake newspaper editions printed for both Lenin & Stalin; difference is, one was suffering from a stroke & the other was a reactionary dictator. Actually, not much of a difference then...
 
There's a journalist from the US in Malmö right now to document whether this place is as dangerous as Trump says or not. Twitter followers have been typing "Praying for you, take care out there" and such.

The world's gone mad.
 
Ubik said:
Click to expand...


Yeah, feck the fact that Colorado's GDP went up by over $2 Billion last year and crime went down. Don't worry about the fact that the states that legalised it did so with democratic votes. Oh, I bet the 3 million illegal voters all voted for it to be legalised and the legal voters wouldn't ever vote for something like that. For fecks sake. Just as you think the USA is starting to understand, then the twats go and say shit like this. Morons.
 
ashgabat said:
There's a journalist from the US in Malmö right now to document whether this place is as dangerous as Trump says or not. Twitter followers have been typing "Praying for you, take care out there" and such.

The world's gone mad.
Click to expand...
I've seen Wallander. You're not fooling me.
 
Carolina Red said:
They want big government when it's telling people how to live and small government when it's to do with being rich.
Click to expand...

It's simpler than that, they want power to states that do what their government want.
 
PedroMendez said:
Click to expand...


No way do I want the American people deciding their foreign policy! I've seen how they make decisions.

I think he's hyperbolic and a bit dishonest in how he frames the issue. The spending is keynesian? That's not the argument. The argument is that if you're gonna fight far as f*** away from home, you're gonna need the logistics to do so. And why do you fight far as f*** away from home? Because in our globalized world you have interests all over. Not that there isn't massive waste in the spending, but I think he's arguing the lesser point because its easier.

This guy would be sitting there in the 18th and 19th centuries, arguing that Britain should downsize it's navy.
 
MTF said:
No way do I want the American people deciding their foreign policy! I've seen how they make decisions.

I think he's hyperbolic and a bit dishonest in how he frames the issue. The spending is keynesian? That's not the argument. The argument is that if you're gonna fight far as f*** away from home, you're gonna need the logistics to do so. And why do you fight far as f*** away from home? Because in our globalized world you have interests all over. Not that there isn't massive waste in the spending, but I think he's arguing the lesser point because its easier.

This guy would be sitting there in the 18th and 19th centuries, arguing that Britain should downsize it's navy.
Click to expand...

nobody with power wants to attack the USA. Not Russia, not Iran and not China. Some crazy jihadis might want to do that at the moment, but you don't need 10 aircraft carrier to throw a bomb at them. AThe UDSSR is gone and nowadays there is no state that could or would threaten the usa, even if you cut the military spending by 75%. The world would not fall apart if the USA would change their foreign policy towards a less interventionist approach, because you are not that great at maintaining peace in the first place.
The misleading part of his argument is, that cutting the military budget would solve all fiscal problems. That is clearly not the case; it would be a great start so.
 
PedroMendez said:
nobody with power wants to attack the USA. Not Russia, not Iran and not China. Some crazy jihadis might want to do that at the moment, but you don't need 10 aircraft carrier to throw a bomb at them. AThe UDSSR is gone and nowadays there is no state that could or would threaten the usa, even if you cut the military spending by 75%. The world would not fall apart if the USA would change their foreign policy towards a less interventionist approach, because you are not that great at maintaining peace in the first place.
The misleading part of his argument is, that cutting the military budget would solve all fiscal problems. That is clearly not the case; it would be a great start so.
Click to expand...

But you kill an industry.
 
PedroMendez said:
nobody with power wants to attack the USA. Not Russia, not Iran and not China. Some crazy jihadis might want to do that at the moment, but you don't need 10 aircraft carrier to throw a bomb at them. AThe UDSSR is gone and nowadays there is no state that could or would threaten the usa, even if you cut the military spending by 75%. The world would not fall apart if the USA would change their foreign policy towards a less interventionist approach, because you are not that great at maintaining peace in the first place.
The misleading part of his argument is, that cutting the military budget would solve all fiscal problems. That is clearly not the case; it would be a great start so.
Click to expand...

I agree that if the mission were: defend the contiguous United States you could probably get by with about with an absolutely minimal permanent ground force, national guard, Navy would barely even need one aircraft carrier, and a defensive Air Force. The two giant oceans to each side are doing 80% of the work for you, and then you just have to worry about those sneaky Canadians, and Mexico not trying to get Texas back again.

The latter part is conjecture. We don't know. We sure don't have total peace, but who's to say that Iran and Saudi wouldn't be in a multi-year conflict in the mid-east? Meanwhile strangling a big portion of the oil reserves that everyone uses (incl Europe, Japan and China) to run everything from our society's logistics to making plastics and chewing gum. We don't even have to imagine that far to see the sort of thing that might become more likely: Saddam Hussein.

After the way the 1st half of the 20th century went, is it really the best idea to assume that absent a serious threat of decisive force at pretty much each side of various regional rivalries (because I'm not arguing that the US the fair arbitreur of all, they're just usually backing up one side and ensuring non-aggression towards them, like Israel, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Japan, Poland-tentative), we wouldn't have regional conflicts for whatever reason?
 
MTF said:
agree that if the mission were: defend the contiguous United States you could probably get by with about with an absolutely minimal permanent ground force, national guard, Navy would barely even need one aircraft carrier, and a defensive Air Force. The two giant oceans to each side are doing 80% of the work for you, and then you just have to worry about those sneaky Canadians, and Mexico not trying to get Texas back again.
Click to expand...
We've done that before, minus the super small navy, in the years prior to WWI and WWII. Of course, that's not the best argument to make for a small land force.
 
ashgabat said:
There's a journalist from the US in Malmö right now to document whether this place is as dangerous as Trump says or not. Twitter followers have been typing "Praying for you, take care out there" and such.

The world's gone mad.
Click to expand...

TBF so far a reporter from 60 minutes Australia (CBS), a reporter from NRK Norway, a reporter from TV2 Norway and a reporter from Dagens Nyheter Sweden has been attacked in Rosengården Malmö.

From a Scandinavian perspective this is what I'd classify as "mad", not the world in general gone mad.
 
langster said:
Firstly, before I go any further, may I compliment you on being maybe the first and only Trump supporter (or sympathiser) who has posted in this thread that is intelligent, articulate, non confrontational and not condescending or rude. It's a pleasure reading your replies, and it's no hassle responding to you either. Thank you.

The respect thing towards Trump is just more of an outsiders view of the US President. Bush was seen as an utter moron, but a very dangerous one, Obama was seen by many as a thoroughly decent chap, articulate, witty and someone who truly cared. Although he might not have been perfect, he was as near as damn it for many outside the US. He had and still has a ridiculously high approval rating in most of Europe and I suspect the western world. Trump has sunk to new depths never seen before and he's a month in. From reading the press here in the UK and reading much of what Europe is saying, and especially with his attitude towards Russia, he may find it difficult to negotiate, or to be respected. You say he won't be a soft touch, that may be true, I don't necessarily believe that, but at the same time, he might not get the chance if other countries turn their back on him and refuse to deal with him at all. China have already given him a strong lecture on Climate Change, and when China are having a go at you about that issue, then you know you are in the shit. Also, his track record isn't good so far and doesn't give a lot of hope. He backed down to Mexico and lied about the meeting with their President, he lied about the phone call with the Australian PM and he's already backed down to China about Taiwan. His inexperience and lack of political nous is showing already and he doesn't listen to his advisors, and that needs to change and fast.

I agree that ISIS could indeed send someone in to the US, but as I said, I doubt it. Far more likely they will radicalise someone already inside the US. However, I have said this before, Trump has hotels all over the world, if he pisses them off, I am pretty certain you will start seeing his properties attacked around the world. His immigration policies need to be carefully thought out as the West is sick of wars and sick of wars in the Middle East. He may not get the back up from other countries his predecessors relied upon, nor will he get the public support either. As I said, his personal vulnerability is unique and with his short temper and irrational personality I hate to think how he would react if one of his hotels got hit. It's another reason why he should have sold them before being allowed to become President imho. That's slightly off topic though, and I understand the USA not wanting another 9/11 but the UK doesn't want another 7/7 and France doesn't want anymore attacks neither does Belgium, but none of those are going as far as the US is and singling out certain countries that's really a smokescreen for stopping people of a certain religion entering the country.

I never laid it all at Trump's feet, just saying it's important how he moves forward from here. I've seen first hand what the death of an industry does to somewhere, but the fact is you cannot live in the past nor hold on to it, you have to move forward. It's now Trump's responsibility how he does that now, and giving the coal industry a stay of execution is dangerous for many reasons but also, it lumps (sorry) the problem in the lap of the next President. It's a bit of a cop out imho. Retraining and educating the people with new skills to find new jobs is a better idea than propping up something that really should be left to die gracefully.
Click to expand...

Right back at you, langster. As a Trump supporter, I know it's potentially explosive to come in here airing my opinions, but you and others are pretty receptive and at least willing to listen to my alternative opinions.

I'll cut through the first bit because there's no real sense to keep focusing on how he's viewed. What you said about negotiations is interesting - can you elaborate on how the perception of Trump will impact negotiations in a negative way? Perhaps more importantly, and assuming we're talking about trade deals, can countries afford to turn their backs on the USA like you claimed? A country like the UK certainly finds itself in a precarious position, but will America realistically suffer because of Trump's personality? Or - and this is a scenario I'm more inclined to believe - won't they fall in line and deal with his peculiar approach to diplomacy so that they can carry on reaping the benefits of having agreements with the biggest economy in the world. It's all well and good citing his change in stance on countries like Mexico and China, but those were always avenues he was destined to take. No, Mexico wouldn't pay for a wall, and nor would China bend one knee. It was much like how he wouldn't put Clinton in jail. He'll get it done where it truly matters so that America's economy can go from strength to strength.

I think ISIS can radicalise people in the US. In fact, some people will just radicalise themselves because their lives have descended to such a low that they need that outlet. More relevant is understanding the difference between the threats we're facing at home and from abroad. I'd highly recommend 'The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11' for anybody who wants to better understand. At the risk of overlooking so many other takeaways, it gives a good insight into how dangerous Al-Qaeda was to America and how people severely underestimated their desire to cause outright devastation on American soil, just waiting to find that one open window that would change the course of history. Of course, they did that through a professional effort that was years in the making. I'm not talking about some lone lunatic packing up his truck and driving to shoot up a local symbol of an over-liberalised society, I'm talking mass chaos on an unprecedented level. That was always Bin Laden's grand idea, and some out there will be looking to outdo him and go down in history. If ISIS is anything close to the organization that Al-Qaeda once was, we underestimate them at our peril.

Although I try as much as possible to avoid pointing the finger at Obama because it automatically provokes skepticism towards any argument, you touched upon exactly what I'm criticising him for. It's Trump's job to ensure that a transition occurs and these communities move on and try to stop living in the past? Unless I'm shown compelling evidence otherwise, I can easily aim the same accusation at Obama. Great, he made policies that would benefit the environment. Unfortunately, he left it all up to who was next in line to deal with the fallout of that. That brings me to the election. Clinton promised that she'd assist these communities in moving forward (and wrongly had quotes taken out of context about the coal mining industry). I think that was also yet another factor that saw her lose - had Obama shown initiative and worked towards better compromises instead of looking like an aggressor who wanted to wipe the industry out without a second thought to the human damage, it might have given her a chance to at least appease them. As it turns out, he gave Trump an easy victory. There were no going to be any graceful deaths on this one, not when Obama set the stage for a fight to the last breath.

JPRouve said:
So it's an Islamic ban and the government has been lying from the beginning. If they think what you are saying, they should ban all countries with muslims, all countries with mosques.
Click to expand...

Covered this. They're playing the game that is politics. It's a very ugly one and not in the least bit noble.

Rams said:
How old are you @Fener1907? Because unemployment has gone up and down throughout history, industries & economics change, communities get devastated and other communities flourish, it has happened throughout the US since it's existence. Take the charts in the below link as reference.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate
Click to expand...

This happens to be an industry that has been on the backfoot while the US has produced some very good employment numbers. I can see where their anger emanates from. To reduce it all to a mere formality because of the inevitability that industries change isn't sufficient justification for sitting back and accepting circumstances without trying to alter them. They will be devastated, but they also will fight back. If you understand the first part, you must understand the second and be content to let it play out naturally like it does.

Sultan said:
Immigration makes economic sense. Politically incorrect. Factually true!
Click to expand...

Agreed. That was quick.

Sultan said:
Maybe "elsewhere" are better and cheaper at producing our needs?

I'm sure Mr Trump and his Billionaire sidekicks have become rich, powerful and successful by buying and using foreign goods and services.
Click to expand...

Considering the subject is the coal mining industry and I'm talking about jobs being moved domestically, 'elsewhere' isn't abroad, so depicting it as 'domestic vs. foreign' isn't conducive to this topic in particular.
 
He's pretty full of himself. I'll look forward to his reaction once Drumpf sacks him half way through the term.
 
Gabrielle Giffords said:
“Town halls and countless constituent meetings were a hallmark of my tenure in Congress. It’s how I was able to serve the people of southern Arizona. I believed that listening to my constituents was the most basic and core tenet of the job I was hired to do.

“I was shot on a Saturday morning. By Monday morning my offices were open to the public. Ron Barber – at my side that Saturday, who was shot multiple times, then elected to Congress in my stead – held town halls. It’s what the people deserve in a representative.

“In the past year, campaigning for gun safety, I have held over 50 public events.

“Many of the members of Congress who are refusing to hold town halls and listen to their constituents concerns are the very same politicians that have opposed commonsense gun violence prevention policies and have allowed the Washington gun lobby to threaten the safety of law enforcement and everyday citizens in our schools, businesses, places of worship, airports, and movie theaters.

“To the politicians who have abandoned their civic obligations, I say this: Have some courage. Face your constituents. Hold town halls.”
Click to expand...
 
Fener1907 said:
Right back at you, langster. As a Trump supporter, I know it's potentially explosive to come in here airing my opinions, but you and others are pretty receptive and at least willing to listen to my alternative opinions.

I'll cut through the first bit because there's no real sense to keep focusing on how he's viewed. What you said about negotiations is interesting - can you elaborate on how the perception of Trump will impact negotiations in a negative way? Perhaps more importantly, and assuming we're talking about trade deals, can countries afford to turn their backs on the USA like you claimed? A country like the UK certainly finds itself in a precarious position, but will America realistically suffer because of Trump's personality? Or - and this is a scenario I'm more inclined to believe - won't they fall in line and deal with his peculiar approach to diplomacy so that they can carry on reaping the benefits of having agreements with the biggest economy in the world. It's all well and good citing his change in stance on countries like Mexico and China, but those were always avenues he was destined to take. No, Mexico wouldn't pay for a wall, and nor would China bend one knee. It was much like how he wouldn't put Clinton in jail. He'll get it done where it truly matters so that America's economy can go from strength to strength.

I think ISIS can radicalise people in the US. In fact, some people will just radicalise themselves because their lives have descended to such a low that they need that outlet. More relevant is understanding the difference between the threats we're facing at home and from abroad. I'd highly recommend 'The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11' for anybody who wants to better understand. At the risk of overlooking so many other takeaways, it gives a good insight into how dangerous Al-Qaeda was to America and how people severely underestimated their desire to cause outright devastation on American soil, just waiting to find that one open window that would change the course of history. Of course, they did that through a professional effort that was years in the making. I'm not talking about some lone lunatic packing up his truck and driving to shoot up a local symbol of an over-liberalised society, I'm talking mass chaos on an unprecedented level. That was always Bin Laden's grand idea, and some out there will be looking to outdo him and go down in history. If ISIS is anything close to the organization that Al-Qaeda once was, we underestimate them at our peril.

Although I try as much as possible to avoid pointing the finger at Obama because it automatically provokes skepticism towards any argument, you touched upon exactly what I'm criticising him for. It's Trump's job to ensure that a transition occurs and these communities move on and try to stop living in the past? Unless I'm shown compelling evidence otherwise, I can easily aim the same accusation at Obama. Great, he made policies that would benefit the environment. Unfortunately, he left it all up to who was next in line to deal with the fallout of that. That brings me to the election. Clinton promised that she'd assist these communities in moving forward (and wrongly had quotes taken out of context about the coal mining industry). I think that was also yet another factor that saw her lose - had Obama shown initiative and worked towards better compromises instead of looking like an aggressor who wanted to wipe the industry out without a second thought to the human damage, it might have given her a chance to at least appease them. As it turns out, he gave Trump an easy victory. There were no going to be any graceful deaths on this one, not when Obama set the stage for a fight to the last breath.



Covered this. They're playing the game that is politics. It's a very ugly one and not in the least bit noble.



This happens to be an industry that has been on the backfoot while the US has produced some very good employment numbers. I can see where their anger emanates from. To reduce it all to a mere formality because of the inevitability that industries change isn't sufficient justification for sitting back and accepting circumstances without trying to alter them. They will be devastated, but they also will fight back. If you understand the first part, you must understand the second and be content to let it play out naturally like it does.



Agreed. That was quick.



Considering the subject is the coal mining industry and I'm talking about jobs being moved domestically, 'elsewhere' isn't abroad, so depicting it as 'domestic vs. foreign' isn't conducive to this topic in particular.
Click to expand...

Any thoughts on the Trump administration's zeal to go after legalized marijuana and the move towards the privatization of prisons?
 
ravi2 said:
Any thoughts on the Trump administration's zeal to go after legalized marijuana and the move towards the privatization of prisons?
Click to expand...

Not really. I mean, yes, I have opinions, but I'm not really for throwing them out there. More of a "hey, I agree/disagree with that" kind of guy.
 
Sorry @Fener1907, but all this 'let's make America great' bollocks is absolute populist scaremongering. It's exactly the same as 'let's put America first', or 'Deutschland uber alles!' It's scary rubbish and extremely dangerous. It's about time the Americans woke up and smelt the roses because under Donald Trump the country is heading down a very dangerous path that, ironically, will inevitably lead to its destruction and the destruction of a large part of the rest of the World.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.