Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

29-01-2017 02:41PM

And for the least surprising news of the day.. The mania that has spread about Muslims with green cards seems to be completely overblown.

They will require extra screening but will be allowed into the country. This really does seem to just be a more severe version of Obama's six month ban on Iraqi refugees in 2011.

People are running around like headless chickens thinking Muslim green card holders from those countries can never get back into America and that's the media's fault. They think a court overturned his entire executive. They think his executive order breaks the constitution. It's all just to make Trump look bad.

Grayson · 29-01-2017 02:41PM

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a debatable phrasing that some believe means militia and others believe means militia and individual.

Legally though since 2008, it seems that it means militia and individual. Even without that, every American believes individuals have the right to bear arms and Trump would be lambasted for trying to use executive powers to change that.

Nice selective quoting. I actually laughed.

Until the 80's every supreme court judgement said that it wasn't about individuals right to bear arms. Individuals had the right to own a gun but it wasn't because it was in the constitution it was just because they're allowed to. Like the way people can drive cars even though it's not in the constitution. When the NRA managed to get the courts to interpret it differently they managed to turn what was a civil issue into a constitutional issue.

Grayson · 29-01-2017 02:44PM

Meanwhile Donald has been busy with important stuff.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/825328817833123840

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/825329757646618624

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/825331665509691393

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/825690087857995776

A Little Pony · 29-01-2017 02:44PM

Trump will just double down on this.

Christy42 · 29-01-2017 02:45PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Unless something has happened within the last hour, this is untrue. The order still stands for 90 days and people won't be flying into the country. Nothing has been overturned.

What happened with the judge applied only to people stuck in airports. Although I'm not fully sure why you said multiple courts?

As to the constitution, people are saying their detention while stuck in limbo could have been against the constitution. Not really Trump's fault or intention. It was only in JFK apparently that it got messed up.
And people are saying the executive order itself could go against the constitution if it's ruled to be against a religion. The biggest Muslim countries in the world can still go to America so it's unlikely it will be found to have broken it.

I can't blame you for not knowing this.. I've noticed a lot of the media today has tried to paint this as a disaster for his executive order and are intentionally misleading people into thinking it's been overturned.

I constantly see people screaming that he's breaking the constitution with everything he does. Isn't the right to bear arms in it? He'd be seen as a traitor by everyone in here if he did it.

It shows the order was pushed through without any serious thought.

You are right that ye would destroyed for any limit on the right to bear arms. Even if it was just for the people he is currently trying to ban from the country. Kinda proves America has some serious issues that are independent of Trump.

Still doesn't explain what this is trying to do by banning people from Iran though.

SkinnyBuddha · 29-01-2017 02:47PM

ricero wrote: »

Got to say im delighted to see trump and putin had a positive talk over the phone.

Yeah I'd say it was positive alright..

Putin:lol
Trumpski:lulz

Putin:You get the money
Trumpski:Yep

Putin:ok...you gonna lift the sanctions?
Trumpski:Sure np

Putin:I seen your vidoeos
Trumpski::eek::eek:

Putin:Your hands aren't the only small thing attached your body
Trumpski::o:o:o

Trumpski: Russian girls stink of pi$$ !SAD!
Putin:

you paid em to do that....

dav3 · 29-01-2017 02:48PM

C. Montgomery Gurns wrote: »

I'm actually on the brink of unfollowing every Irish page off FB. For the last week the IT, that joe.ie rubbish, jesus even Lovin Dublin (which is meant to be about bars, food and things to do) has posted nothing but Trump take downs since Friday last week.

He won.

He is more successful than you are, more intelligent than you are, and more admired than you are. In 8 years he will go down as one of the finest presidents in US history and most of his detractors will be too embarrassed to admit it. 8 years from now America will be industrially stronger, will be engaged in less foreign conflicts than at any point prior to WW 2, and will be reaping the rewards of a slumping crime rate and a slashed welfare bill.

Get the **** over it.

I think we're seeing the Streisand Effect in full force against trump. The more people see hysterical posts like the one above or hear steve bannan trying to silence the media, the more they're going to talk about him, it's human nature.

'OMG leave the dear leader alone, stop talking about him!' will just make people talk about him even more.

The same people that have been bleating on about free speech for the past couple of years now want it curbed. If you don't like what someone says on the internet, you should toughen up, you don't get the right to reply and if you do you're referred to as a snowflake. These are the rules laid out by trump, bannon and his far-right internet minions. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Little CuChulainn · 29-01-2017 02:50PM

Deleted User wrote: »

And for the least surprising news of the day.. The mania that has spread about Muslims with green cards seems to be completely overblown.

They will require extra screening but will be allowed into the country. This really does seem to just be a more severe version of Obama's six month ban on Iraqi refugees in 2011.

People are running around like headless chickens thinking Muslim green card holders from those countries can never get back into America and that's the media's fault. They think a court overturned his entire executive. They think his executive order breaks the constitution. It's all just to make Trump look bad.

That's called back pedaling. At the very least you could call it slo[[y legislation. Just in case you missed it in your link

Earlier, a Department of Homeland Security official said people holding green cards, making them legal permanent U.S. residents, were included in President Donald Trump's executive action temporarily barring people from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States

and that was acted on too.

29-01-2017 03:06PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

That's called back pedaling. At the very least you could call it slo[[y legislation. Just in case you missed it in your link

I don't think it was back pedaling.. I just can't see Trump caring at all about protests over the 100-200 people who were affected. It was a campaign promise and the extra screenings ties in with what he promised more that a full ban.

The full text also details a lot of the screening process. They can't back pedal that into it.

Trump said "You see it at the airports. You see it all over. It's working out very nicely and we're going to have a very, very strict ban, and we're going to have extreme vetting, which we should have had in this country for many years."
Again, he's saying vetting so that likely applies to the green card holders.

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

and that was acted on too.

But the White House then clarified what was really happening. Those people got caught at a really bad time.

If my tone implies that nothing is happening or I agree with it, that's not the case. I'm trying to find truth in the middle of a determined effort to confuse people.

Cartouche · 29-01-2017 03:28PM

In terms of terrorist threats to the United States from Muslim countries, I was surprised that Saudi Arabia is never mentioned. 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.

Grayson · 29-01-2017 03:33PM

Cartouche wrote: »

In terms of terrorist threats to the United States from Muslim countries, I was surprised that Saudi Arabia is never mentioned. 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.

If the ban that Trump brought in had been brought in 20 years ago, not one single attack would have been stopped because of it.

29-01-2017 03:42PM

I decided to look up some polls to see America's opinions regarding refugees..

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/u-s-public-seldom-has-welcomed-refugees-into-country/
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/terrorism-fears-rise-post-paris-back-force-oppose/story?id=35327667

For a country where the majority seems to not want refugees, I'm seeing a lot of people losing their minds over it. Trump's causing American sentiment towards it to be extremely positive but that will certainly drop again the next time there's a big ISIS attack there or in Europe.

RobertKK · 29-01-2017 03:58PM

dav3 wrote: »

There are a good few people tying themselves in knots trying to defend trump's muslim ban.

His election pledge throughout the campaign involved the security and protection the US which included a ban on muslims entering the country.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-ban-registry-berlin-attack-twitter-you-know-my-plans-immigration-racism-a7489611.html

and

He decided not to ban Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. Yet some people still don't get it, it was never about security.

Speaking of security, what's the problem with countries banning Israelis? We should have done it ourselves with the contempt they've shown this country over the years.

Pakistan is a nuclear power, so is Saudi Arabia who funded the Pakistani nuclear program - they did not fund it for the fun of it. Saudi Arabia also have several hundreds of billions of dollars invested in the US.

Trump speaking to Sean Hannity did say he does not like how some countries are funding Islamic extremism, this was a question in relation to Saudi Arabia. He initially said he had to be careful with what he said, implying consequences - under Obama the Saudis threatened the US with withdrawal of their money from the US which would have been very negative for the country.

Little CuChulainn · 29-01-2017 04:01PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I decided to look up some polls to see America's opinions regarding refugees..

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/u-s-public-seldom-has-welcomed-refugees-into-country/
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/terrorism-fears-rise-post-paris-back-force-oppose/story?id=35327667

For a country where the majority seems to not want refugees, I'm seeing a lot of people losing their minds over it. Trump's causing American sentiment towards it to be extremely positive but that will certainly drop again the next time there's a big ISIS attack there or in Europe.

That report is from a week after the Paris attacks. A few other interesting results.

Opposition in part reflects skepticism about the U.S. government’s ability to screen out terrorists; 52 percent are dubious, and they’re especially likely to oppose entry.

That said, if refugees are admitted, an overwhelming 78 percent of Americans say all should be considered equally, without regard to their religion.

29-01-2017 04:08PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

That said, if refugees are admitted, an overwhelming 78 percent of Americans say all should be considered equally, without regard to their religion.

On first reading, that sentence makes it sound like 78% of Americans want refugees who have been admitted to be treated the same as all other people and religions.

I'm not sure if that's how you read it so I'm just pointing out that 18% of Americans think Christians should get priority and 78% think religion shouldn't be a factor in refugee status being given.

Little CuChulainn · 29-01-2017 04:10PM

Deleted User wrote: »

On first reading, that sentence makes it sound like 78% of Americans want refugees who have been admitted to be treated the same as all other people and religions.

I'm not sure if that's how you read it so I'm just pointing out that 18% of Americans think Christians should get priority and 78% think religion shouldn't be a factor in refugee status being given.

I would read it as 78% do not believe religion should be a factor in wether they are granted entry.

Christy42 · 29-01-2017 04:13PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Pakistan is a nuclear power, so is Saudi Arabia who funded the Pakistani nuclear program - they did not fund it for the fun of it. Saudi Arabia also have several hundreds of billions of dollars invested in the US.

Trump speaking to Sean Hannity did say he does not like how some countries are funding Islamic extremism, this was a question in relation to Saudi Arabia. He initially said he had to be careful with what he said, implying consequences - under Obama the Saudis threatened the US with withdrawal of their money from the US which would have been very negative for the country.

So he just picked a fee random other Muslim countries since he couldn't pick them

29-01-2017 04:25PM

Christy42 wrote: »

So he just picked a fee random other Muslim countries since he couldn't pick them

The only random one seems to be Iran. If I asked you to name the worst countries in the world, the other six would likely be in your top ten or fifteen.. Five of them have been bombed by the US within the last eight years.

Christy42 · 29-01-2017 04:30PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The only random one seems to be Iran. If I asked you to name the worst countries in the world, the other six would likely be in your top ten or fifteen.. Five of them have been bombed by the US within the last eight years.

Ignoring the rest of the post for a minute. He only banned people from ONE random country. It should be none. That is still horrific in itself.
I agree they tend to be horrible countries but that does not seem to be the main criteria for the banning so is largely unimportant. This was meant to make Americans safer from terrorism. This list does not, in the slightest. It largely ignores anywhere they are likely to be from

BabyCheeses · 29-01-2017 04:34PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I decided to look up some polls to see America's opinions regarding refugees..

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/u-s-public-seldom-has-welcomed-refugees-into-country/
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/terrorism-fears-rise-post-paris-back-force-oppose/story?id=35327667

For a country where the majority seems to not want refugees, I'm seeing a lot of people losing their minds over it. Trump's causing American sentiment towards it to be extremely positive but that will certainly drop again the next time there's a big ISIS attack there or in Europe.

How many terrorist attacks would America not have had with the ban?

InTheTrees · 29-01-2017 04:36PM

Let's face it, he didn't ban any countries that he has business interests in even though they are even more guilty of backing terrorism than the countries he did ban.

His supporters wont mind though.

Grayson · 29-01-2017 04:38PM

I like the way he calls it vetting. It's not vetting if people are banned based on the country they're from.

Leroy42 · 29-01-2017 04:49PM

Trump sells himself as the great business man, he gets things done.

No matter what way you look at this, and I agree that in some cases it is being overblown, but in making decisions he does need to take into consideration PR and this is a PR disaster.

He has a good meeting with May, and within 24 hours she is back-peddling furiously from him.

He is only considering what is good for him, not good for the country. Plenty of ways this could have been done to get to the same result without all the crap that is surrounding it. This is nothing more than a PR stunt to suit him and his base, with no consideration of the wider implications.

The man, and those around him, have no experience of politics and it is showing.

Regardless of how one thing Obama did on the economy, crime etc, there is no doubt that US standing within the West improved after the disaster of W Bush. Trump has already started to erode much of that good work.

peasant · 29-01-2017 04:52PM

Meanwhile, while nobody's looking, Trump appoints his alt right advisor Joseph Göbbels Stephen Bannon as permanent member to the National Security Council while putting the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the director of national intelligence on the back benches

In a presidential memorandum, President Donald Trump gave top aide Stephen Bannon a role on the National Security Council, while military and intelligence leaders including the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff were downgraded. Bannon, the White House chief strategist and former Breitbart chief, will attend regular meetings of the council, while the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the director of national intelligence will only attend meetings relating to their “responsibilities and expertise.” Chief of staff Reince Priebus was given a similar role to Bannon’s.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/01/29/bannon-joins-national-security-council.html?via=desktop&source=copyurl

So the national security policy of the USA will now be decided by the alt facts of the alt right.

Am I the only one who's scared by this? :eek:

RobertKK · 29-01-2017 04:53PM

Christy42 wrote: »

So he just picked a fee random other Muslim countries since he couldn't pick them

I wouldn't say random, Obama vetoed a bill that congress pushed through that made Saudi Arabia liable for 9/11.

I think the US/Saudi relationship is heading one over time and it will not be good for the duplicitous Saudis.

HellSquirrel · 29-01-2017 04:54PM

And Jared Kushner, to add to that group, peasant. Because Trump's a man that believes in keeping power in the family.

Christy42 · 29-01-2017 04:57PM

RobertKK wrote: »

I wouldn't say random, Obama vetoed a bill that congress pushed through that made Saudi Arabia liable for 9/11.

I think the US/Saudi relationship is heading one over time and it will not be good for the duplicitous Saudis.

What does your post have to do with Iran?

HellSquirrel · 29-01-2017 04:59PM

Okay, look people, you that don't agree with me can just ignore this post. I don't need several pages of bitching back and forth about how Trump is just misunderstood. Let us start from here with the idea that I'm not changing my mind and this is purely for Irish citizens that want to make their voices heard, no matter how small it is.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/members/default.asp?housetype=0&HouseNum=32&disp=const

Bear in mind that they can be emailed as well as written to. Basically, if you want to send this or something like to your TD, feel free to. Above link will get you the names/postal addresses/emails of your local reps.

Dear Deputy [Name]

I am writing to you in light of the upcoming St. Patrick’s Day traditional visit by An Taoiseach Enda Kenny to the new U.S. President. This tradition will be seen as a gesture of support of the new President's policies, many of which are anathema to our democratic nation. As a member of your constituency, I ask you to highlight the impact of this support to your party leader and colleagues in Dáil Éireann.

I wish to raise this particularly in light of the “Muslim ban”, the recent executive order that has affected the lives of innocent and thoroughly vetted, people attempting to immigrate to the “land of the free”, including green card holders.

American history is bound up in the history of Irish emigration to the United States over many generations. This ban is against American law (Immigration and Nationality Act, 1965) and it is against human decency. I do not ask that Ireland interferes in the politics of another nation, but I do ask, as an Irish citizen, that Ireland speaks against this inhumane policy; that our leader does not go to the United States on March 17th and present the current American president with the shamrock. It is a betrayal of ancestors and family that left this country for hope of a better life in America to close our eyes to this executive order and its consequences.

We are currently taking active part in implementing this policy as migrants from these countries are being prevented from boarding in the countries they are currently flying from, including Ireland. While there is no humane way around this, we cannot continue to support this short-sighted and cruel policy.

As a member of your constituency, and a citizen of Ireland, I hope you will defend our country’s long tradition of reaching out to the most vulnerable at home and abroad for many years to come.

Is mise, le meas,

Trump supporters, just hold fire for five goddam minutes, please.

29-01-2017 05:03PM

BabyCheeses wrote: »

How many terrorist attacks would America not have had with the ban?

The same amount regardless. I'm not defending it.

BabyCheeses · 29-01-2017 05:03PM

peasant wrote: »

Meanwhile, while nobody's looking, Trump appoints his alt right advisor Joseph Göbbels Stephen Bannon as permanent member to the National Security Council while putting the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the director of national intelligence on the back benches

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/01/29/bannon-joins-national-security-council.html?via=desktop&source=copyurl

So the national security policy of the USA will now be decided by the alt facts of the alt right.

Am I the only one who's scared by this? :eek:

They can now claim the Jews are behind everything.

Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

Comments