Anyone else becoming terrified of Liberals.

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It's a ban on certain Muslim majority countries, it's not a Muslim ban. You're twisting it. The vast majority of Muslims are still allowed to enter the Country.

Trump himself called it a Muslim ban throughout his campaign. He hasnt banned Muslim countries the US trades a lot of oil with or that Trump has businesses in. But it's a Muslim ban. Trump said so many times. Talk to him.

This is the headline

"Donald Trump Might Cut Violence-Against-Women Programs"

So you're wrong claiming that and it's pure speculation.

It is listed on his proposed cuts so your 'pure speculation' comment is unfounded.

So more speculation then.

The article YOU linked says he has planned it. Do you disagree with the article you linked?

So no actual proof and just more speculation? Breitbart is far right, it's not a nazi or kkk site.

The site posts just inside the legal definition of hate speech for such 'news' sites. It uses code and innuendo to bridge the gap to right supremacy. The comments section is dominated by the KKK, Fascists, Nazis etc. The site quacks like a duck and walks like a duck and so does its former CEO.

Sessions you're right he lost a position because of remarks I'll concede that. He has a checkered past.

No. He is a racist.

The rest of your points are garbage. The US are responsible for Iraq and Hussein and it was all based on one big fat lie. The "We came, we saw, he died" spiel with Gaddafi isn't far behind.

You said the US president executed a foreign leader. You lied.

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

No, I was pointing out their illegal immigration and border problem stances were pretty much identical to Trump's. Majority of Americans agree with Trump in the Politico poll with his ban. You're the one claiming Trump is a fascist, I never claimed anyone to be. You'll need to do better than speculate over alternative facts to convince me otherwise.

You said if Trump was a fascist then Obama/Clinton was and this was your proof. Didn't work out for you so move the goalposts.

Alternative facts? Thats something that fascist supporters like Kelly Anne Conway make up and use isn't it?

demfad wrote: »

Trump himself called it a Muslim ban throughout his campaign. He hasnt banned Muslim countries the US trades a lot of oil with or that Trump has businesses in. But it's a Muslim ban. Trump said so many times. Talk to him.

The site posts just inside the legal definition of hate speech for such 'news' sites. It uses code and innuendo to bridge the gap to right supremacy. The comments section is dominated by the KKK, Fascists, Nazis etc. The site quacks like a duck and walks like a duck and so does its former CEO.

No. He is a racist.

You said the US president executed a foreign leader. You lied.

Did you expect I meant Obama himself killed someone with his own hands? The US Government were involved in the invasion and killing of foreign leaders, like it or lump it, that's a fact. The bolded part, when you have to resort to lies and try to justify your alternative facts there's no point talking to you anymore. Good day.

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Did you expect I meant Obama himself killed someone with his own hands? The US Government were involved in the invasion and killing of foreign leaders, like it or lump it, that's a fact. The bolded part, when you have to resort to lies and try to justify your alternative facts there's no point talking to you anymore. Good day.

You said the president of the United States had a foreign leader killed. You lied.
If anyone takes a look at the comment section on Breitbart (not recomended) they will see supporters of these groups and worse dominating.

Again, alternative facts are for the Kelly Anne Conways, the Trumps the Putins and minions. Don't push the phrase on reasonable people.

Look at all the Nazi's. Hide yo kids, hide yo wife.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/01/28/sheriff-clarke-im-tired-one-percenters-like-mark-zuckerberg-lecturing-us/

I don't visit or post there regulary fwiw, but I have never seen what you describe. It's like reddit or where ever else, the comments for the most part are relatively clean. I'd compare it to a Sean Hannity audience, far right.

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Look at all the Nazi's. Hide yo kids, hide yo wife.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/01/28/sheriff-clarke-im-tired-one-percenters-like-mark-zuckerberg-lecturing-us/

I don't visit or post there regulary fwiw, but I have never seen what you describe. It's like reddit or where ever else, the comments for the most part are relatively clean. I'd compare it to a Sean Hannity audience, far right.

Bull. Link well back to when Bannon was CEO. Were talking about Bannon

If anyone types 'black' into the search bar they will get a nice list of white supremacist headlines.

Fiest up: Black Lawyer Calls on Black Jurors to Vote ‘Innocent’ for Any Black Person Accused of Murdering a White Person Not recommended.

Edit: Looks like Bannon was into Eugenics (racial purity) about a decade ago

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/02/09/steve-bannon-wanted-mel-gibson-for-his-movie-about-nazis-abortion-mutants.html

Is the article inaccurate? I seen a story about a Church before but haven't seen much else.

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/heres-how-black-people-could-use-jury-nullification-to-break-the-justice-system/

"Maybe it’s time for black people to use the same tool white people have been using to defy a system they do not consent to: jury nullification. White juries regularly refuse to convict or indict cops for murder. White juries refuse to convict vigilantes who murder black children. White juries refuse to convict other white people for property crimes. White juries act like the law is just a guideline and their personal morality (or lack thereof) should be controlling."

Personally, I don't see the problem calling out a lawyer spewing such hatred and calling on people to ignore the law.

edit: Thread is gone way off topic now - You're free to think what you want about Trump. Personally I think Trump is a hard hitter and so are some of his cabinet members, and they're the kind of people you need to straighten messes out. There's some cabinet members I don't agree with, and things he's done I don't agree with either. I think a lot of the hysteria would dissipate if he stayed off twitter but I doubt that's gonna happen. Have to remember it was a choice of two flawed candidates, he's hasn't done something so outlandish yet that I feel the need to start opposing him, maybe he will sooner or later who knows. It's my opinion with the twitter use, the media is fielding most of the hysteria.

Democrats are racist towards blacks just as the Republicans are perhaps not as blatantly though. The Democrats appealed to Blacks during the election so they could get their vote. You could say the same about the Latinos. The Dems were using the fear of White America as the reason for voting Dems. For huge swathes of Blacks in America life has not changed enormously when Obama got into the White House. You could say the Republicans are the cause for that but the more likely reason is that the Democrats are not representative of all Blacks indeed some of Obama's biggest critics came from that very demographic.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Democrats are racist towards blacks

So you are presumable saying that Barack Obama the Democratic US president for 8 years was racist towards blacks?

demfad wrote: »

So you are presumable saying that Barack Obama the Democratic US president for 8 years was racist towards blacks?

The inner cities are a war zone

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/01/us/chicago-murders-2016/

demfad wrote: »

So you are presumable saying that Barack Obama the Democratic US president for 8 years was racist towards blacks?

Obama made sure not to divide Black Americans from White Americans even though Black Americans have concerns and issues that set them apart from their counterparts. Fact is Obama became too much of a Republican when he got into office.

Zubeneschamali

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

The inner cities are a war zone

Wait until Trump sends the National Guard in to tackle crime, then you'll see a war zone.

If Chicago doesn't fix the horrible "carnage" going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings (up 24% from 2016), I will send in the Feds!

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Wait until Trump sends the National Guard in to tackle crime, then you'll see a war zone.

If Chicago doesn't fix the horrible "carnage" going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings (up 24% from 2016), I will send in the Feds!

Can't get any worse.

Brian?

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Can't get any worse.

Care to place a wager on that?

Zubeneschamali

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Can't get any worse.

A republican governor has already said that what is needed to stop protests is "another Kent State" - meaning have the national guard fire live rounds into the crowds.

If that starts, it will make Chicago gang violence look very tame indeed.

Brian? wrote: »

Care to place a wager on that?

I'll willing to bet but the problem with betting on this is the time frame, I think it'll improve but it might take 2 years or more. If the terms are 2 or 3 months or something I'm just burning money.

Brian? wrote: »

Care to place a wager on that?

Chicago is like what you see in Iraq or Afghanistan. Not trying to be provocative here. Gang violence in Chicago has destroyed the communities there. A crisis that has not been tackled by Republican or Democratic predecessors. Trump's convention speech was directed at cities like Chicago and nobody on the left can argue Chicago is not facing lawlessness. Bareface denial.

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Chicago is like what you see in Iraq or Afghanistan. Not trying to be provocative here. Gang violence in Chicago has destroyed the communities there. A crisis that has not been tackled by Republican or Democratic predecessors. Trump's convention speech was directed at cities like Chicago and nobody on the left can argue Chicago is not facing lawlessness. Bareface denial.

The situation in Chicago is bad, but it's not like Afghanistan or Iraq.

https://www.google.ie/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=chicago&tbm=nws

El_Duderino 09

KingBrian2 wrote:

Chicago is like what you see in Iraq or Afghanistan. Not trying to be provocative here. Gang violence in Chicago has destroyed the communities there. A crisis that has not been tackled by Republican or Democratic predecessors. Trump's convention speech was directed at cities like Chicago and nobody on the left can argue Chicago is not facing lawlessness. Bareface denial.

If there wasn't an anti black/minority angle, he would be touching it. It's about making his base feel good at the expense of the minority.

He might actually try to help the people of Chicago. Most likely he will just wait for a cop to be killed or a cop to kill a black lad in dubious circumstances. Then he can back the white cop agsinst the black lads. Simple divide and conquer.

I'd be shocked if he does anything useful to help the people of Chicago. What do you expect him to actually do beyond pointing to the black people as the problem?

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If there wasn't an anti black/minority angle, he would be touching it. It's about making his base feel good at the expense of the minority.

He might actually try to help the people of Chicago. Most likely he will just wait for a cop to be killed or a cop to kill a black lad in dubious circumstances. Then he can back the white cop agsinst the black lads. Simple divide and conquer.

I'd be shocked if he does anything useful to help the people of Chicago. What do you expect him to actually do beyond pointing to the black people as the problem?

It was the city authorities that have let the people down in Chicago and before we drag Trump into this quagmire it was Trump that highlighted the endemic gang violence in Chicago when Pres Obama was doing nothing down in D.C.

As for my comparisons with Iraq and Afghanistan it is not much of a gap between the two. Weapons in the hands of felons, entire regions not under gvt control. If the US worried more about the Mid West than the Arab world the gangs in Chicago would have far less impunity.

El_Duderino 09

KingBrian2 wrote:

It was the city authorities that have let the people down in Chicago and before we drag Trump into this quagmire it was Trump that highlighted the endemic gang violence in Chicago when Pres Obama was doing nothing down in D.C.
As for my comparisons with Iraq and Afghanistan it is not much of a gap between the two. Weapons in the hands of felons, entire regions not under gvt control. If the US worried more about the Mid West than the Arab world the gangs in Chicago would have far less impunity.

Righty-o, Obama's dreadful ... Iraq and Afghanistan, weapons in the hands of felons.

What's trump going to do?

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Righty-o, Obama's dreadful ... Iraq and Afghanistan, weapons in the hands of felons.

What's trump going to do?

Well he not doing a good job getting his message across that America has to stop arming Jihadi fanatics in the Muslim world and when he turns around and tries to implement a travel ban gets a right kicking.

The idea that persons who oppose Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, Hamas and Islamic Jihad are somehow Islamophobic is a tired excuse from liberals who want to pretend that Pres Trump is a threat to American democracy.

marienbad

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Well he not doing a good job getting his message across that America has to stop arming Jihadi fanatics in the Muslim world and when he turns around and tries to implement a travel ban gets a right kicking.

The idea that persons who oppose Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, Hamas and Islamic Jihad are somehow Islamophobic is a tired excuse from liberals who want to pretend that Pres Trump is a threat to American democracy.

Why is Saudi Arabia not included in his travel ban ?

marienbad wrote: »

Why is Saudi Arabia not included in his travel ban ?

You'd have to ask the man of the hour that.

marienbad

KingBrian2 wrote: »

You'd have to ask the man of the hour that.

So no opinion then ? What about stooping the Jihadi fanatics you referred to ?

marienbad wrote: »

So no opinion then ? What about stooping the Jihadi fanatics you referred to ?

Refugees who have come into Europe or America who have a background as a member of a terrorist organisation should be turned away at the border. Requests are piling up in Athens and Malta for Muslim refugees to gain access to richer states. This will continue until and unless Europe and America has a coherent policy towards this refugees. You can't let all these people in and as you know Europe will be inundated with Muslims as a result. We have no idea than are they part of ISIS, Hamas, Islamic Jihad. It will be a case of Muslims living in Europe and the authorities won't know were they came from.

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Refugees who have come into Europe or America who have a background as a member of a terrorist organisation should be turned away at the border. Requests are piling up in Athens and Malta for Muslim refugees to gain access to richer states. This will continue until and unless Europe and America has a coherent policy towards this refugees. You can't let all these people in and as you know Europe will be inundated with Muslims as a result. We have no idea than are they part of ISIS, Hamas, Islamic Jihad. It will be a case of Muslims living in Europe and the authorities won't know were they came from.

Name one act of terrorism committed on US soil by a refugee.

marienbad

KingBrian2 wrote: »

. This will continue until and unless Europe and America has a coherent policy towards this refugees.

And this travel ban is a coherent policy ?