[img] https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRrmNB404SkisEc7SdYMtp6TzoiiF_3iMzfJn1XUY_xE2plhgyHJe-ZMSE [/img]
Can I check if I've understood chewy's latest spiel correctly? He's suggesting that Western liberalism results in religious fundamentalism?
Can somebody remind me which of the major US parties has the support of (and supports the policies of) a major religion?
Perhaps it's in the delivery.
You see, for some strange reason there's little outrage when lefties crackdown on immigration:
2 wrongs don't make a right, & someone else's mistake should never be used as justification to make another!
A rasict is a rasict & both ends of the political spectrum are capable.
Besides sometimes there's little difference between the Dems & the GOP.
But what was the point of your post I've quoted?
ninfan - Memberi don't recall the anti-Obama riots, do you?
No that's because racists and bigots are renowned for their peaceful and tolerant character.
Obviously there's always a few who unfortunately give racists a bad name :
[url= https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2009/racist-backlash-greets-president-barack-obama ]Racist Backlash Greets President Barack Obama[/url]
[code]I should have listened to her
So hard to keep control
We kept on eating, but
Our bloated belly's still not full
She gave us all she had, but
We went and took some more
Can't seem to shut her legs
Our mother nature is a whore
I got my propaganda
I got revisionism
I got my violence
In hi-def ultra-realism
All a part of this great nation
I got my fist
I got my plan
I got survivalism
Hypnotic sound of sirens
Echoing through the street
The cocking of the rifles
The marching of the feet
You see your world on fire
Don't try to act surprised
We did just what you told us
Lost our faith along the way
And found ourselves believing your lies
I got my propaganda
I got revisionism
I got my violence
In hi-def ultra-realism
All a part of this great nation
I got my fist
I got my plan
I got survivalism
All bruised and broken, bleeding
She asked to take my hand
I turned, just keep on walking
But you'd do the same thing in the circumstance
I'm sure you'll understand
I got my propaganda
I got revisionism
I got my violence
In hi-def ultra-realism
All a part of this great nation
I got my fist
I got my plan
I got survivalism
You got your pacifism - I got survivalism[/code]
[code]I pushed the button and elected him to office, and
He pushed the button, and he dropped the bomb
You pushed the button, and could watch it on the television
Those mother_______ didn't last too long
I'm sick of hearing 'bout the have and have-not's
Have some personal accountability
The biggest problem with the way that we are doing things is
The more we let you have, the less that I'll be keeping for me
Well, I used to stand for something
Now I'm on my hands and knees
Turning in my god for this one
And he signs his name with a capital G
Don't give a shit about the temperature in Guatemala
Don't really see what all the fuss is about
Ain't gonna worry about no future generations
And I'm sure somebody's gonna figure it out
Don't try to tell me that some power can corrupt a person
You haven't had enough to know what it's like
You're only angry 'cause you wish you were in my position
Now nod your head because you know that I'm right, all right!
Well, I used to stand for something
But forgot what that could be
There's a lot of me inside you
Maybe you're afraid to see
Well, I used to stand for something
Now I'm on my hands and knees
Turning in my god for this one
And he signs his name with a capital G
Well, I used to stand for something
But forgot what that could be
There's a lot of me inside you
Maybe you're afraid to see
Well, I used to stand for something
Now I'm on my hands and knees
Turning in my god for this one
And he signs his name with a capital G[/code]
[i]#For G, sing T[/i]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Zero_(album)
I wish I had a shilling
For every senseless killing
I'd buy a government
America's for sale
And you can get a good deal on it
And make a healthy profit
Or maybe, tear it apart
Start with the assumption
That a million people are smart
Smarter than one
ninfan - Member
i don't recall the anti-Obama riots, do you?
How about the millions who peacefully protested about Trump? Did you choose not to see them? How about all those who peacefully protested against their unconstitutional immigration bans?
Let us know when your ready to take on the issues.
Their coffee is gopping!
Fair enough. Protest away.
Can I check if I've understood chewy's latest spiel correctly? He's suggesting that Western liberalism results in religious fundamentalism?
I have no idea.
How about the millions who peacefully protested about Trump? Did you choose not to see them?
They should have gone out and voted instead, you can probably thank Russell Brand for persuading them that it wasn't worthwhile
How about all those who peacefully protested against their unconstitutional immigration bans?
You're mixing up opinion with fact again, that's for the courts to decide - tell me, do you think that the courts should decide the issue on the basis of the legal arguments or the volume and intensity of the protests in favour of a desired outcome?
They should have gone out and voted instead, you can probably thank Russell Brand for persuading them that it wasn't worthwhile
Perhaps they did, as frequently pointed out more people voted for Clinton and there was a very high independant vote this time around. Also by the numbers it was only about 1-200,000 votes across 3 states that swung it for trump.
You're mixing up opinion with fact again, that's for the courts to decide - tell me, do you think that the courts should decide the issue on the basis of the legal arguments
It appears they are deciding, with appeals thrown out and judges decaring the orders to be poorly thought out.
You seem to be confusing the issues yourself - highlighting a minority who resorted to violence at the expense of what you seem to think are worthless protesters.
Are you saying that there are no circumstances under which the public should take part in demonstrations?
[i]Marlow Stern -[/i] What are your thoughts on the rise of candidate Trump? It almost doesn’t seem real.
[i]Trent Reznor -[/i] It is surreal. I’ll admit that I was entertained during the Republican debates and the whole process of whittling them down. It’s kind of fun to see a grenade go off and see these guys—I hate every one of them—be eliminated and humiliated. But it stopped being funny months ago. It’s sad to see the discourse be dragged this low. It’s absurd that this is even happening.
[i][url= http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/10/14/trent-reznor-on-the-rise-of-trump-it-s-absurd-that-this-is-even-happening.html ]Marlow Stern[/url] -[/i] One thing that may not go away is Donald Trump, who may very well launch a TV news network with advisers Roger Ailes and Steve Bannon post-election. Are you worried about Trump’s lasting effect on the political landscape?
[i]Trent Reznor -[/i] I’m absolutely terrified about that. Hopefully Trump will flame out any minute now, but the effect of him—or he himself—is not going to go away, and there’s going to be an awful lot of very energized followers. We all know they’re not going to say, “Well, let’s support Hillary because she’s the president now.” She’s walking into a terrible situation."
Are you saying that there are no circumstances under which the public should take part in demonstrations?
Pre-decision/legislation protest is entirely legitimate (see, for example, the SWC marches pre-Iraq parliamentary vote) protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept
Like Vietnam?
protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
Well that is sorted then, we should all shut up and salute the new leader...
Except that is not how democracy works, you have the right to organise and protest, even more so if the actions your are protesting about are legally questionable at best.
I believe UKIP promised to bring hundreds of thousands onto the streets to defend the right to ignor the judicary.
In this case you have the government again questioning the status of the court system who are applying the rule of law, again the Trump is on twitter making his claims.
Donald J. Trump ?@realDonaldTrump 2h2 hours ago
More
I have instructed Homeland Security to check people coming into our country VERY CAREFULLY. The courts are making the job very difficult!
17,201 replies 11,800 retweets 53,701 likes
Reply 17K Retweet 12K
Like 54K
Donald J. Trump ?@realDonaldTrump 2h2 hours ago
More
Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!
24,970 replies 12,948 retweets 52,784 likes
Reply 25K Retweet 13K
Like 53K
Donald J. Trump ?@realDonaldTrump 22h22 hours ago
More
The judge opens up our country to potential terrorists and others that do not have our best interests at heart. Bad people are very happy!
One of the key principles of a democracy is the role of the courts and their independance. That being attacked should get everyone out on the streets, the reasons that the courst are separate from the government are obvious.
Pre-decision/legislation protest is entirely legitimate, protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
As we have had the National Parks & Access to the Countryside Act 1949 and CROW Act 2000 etc you can stop whining about lack of access rights. Decision made, get over it and p*** off out of it.
legitimately made decision
😆
protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
Yes it is. So are you saying that in those circumstances the public should not take part in demonstrations?
The US courts seem to think it is not legitimate ?
So are you saying that in those circumstances the public should not take part in demonstrations?
I see your problem here. You're asking ninfan a sensible question and expecting a sensible answer.
protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
What about universal suffrage?
protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
Are you suggesting people who genuinely believe in something should just give up if a popular vote doesn't go their way? That way, we'd have no political opposition which, history tells us, never works out too well.
protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
What about the poll tax?
You're asking ninfan a sensible question and expecting a sensible answer.
Not really.
protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
What about slavery?
The US courts seem to think it is not legitimate ?
No, a temporary stay/injunction was put in place pending a hearing on the substantive issues, the court has not decided whether it's illegal, just that there's a realistic possibility that it might be.
No, a temporary stay/injunction was put in place pending a hearing on the substantive issues, the court has not decided whether it's illegal, just that there's a realistic possibility that it might be.
😆
just that there's a realistic possibility that it might be
Sounds to me like a good reason to be on the streets protesting.
ninfan you didn't have any problem supporting the Countryside Alliance when they were protesting about a government carrying out, legally, a policy which was an election promise, remember?
[img] 
[/img]
Methinks you are a tiny bit biased in your narrative.
protesting about a legitimately made decision because it didn't go your way is an entirely different concept.
What about Martin Luther King & the March on Washington?
BTW ninfan........[i]"fight prejudice"[/i] Awww, the poor snowflakes 😆
and when you can't even count on your own party for support
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-06/donald-trump-hits-out-at-judge-robarts-again-over-travel-ban/8243352
US senator Patrick Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Mr Trump seemed intent on precipitating a constitutional crisis.Some Republicans also expressed discomfort with the situation.
"I think it is best not to single out judges for criticism," Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell told CNN.
Republican senator Ben Sasse, a vocal critic of Mr Trump, was less restrained:
"We don't have so-called judges … we don't have so-called presidents, we have people from three different branches of government who take an oath to uphold and defend the constitution," he told ABC America.
He is now in the very dangerous position of willing something to happen, the way he has whipped up fear and used it is a very real warning to the rest of the world. It's one of the ways terrorism actually wins - you don't need to do that much just create fear and in this case it's the President who is doing that for them. It will be interesting the next time a white kid goes on a shooting spree to see how that is handled as statistically it's more likely to happen.
mrlebowski - Member
What about Martin Luther King & the March on Washington?
(Click the poster below to see detail information)
You mean this march for [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_on_Washington_for_Jobs_and_Freedom ]jobs and freedom?[/url]?
[url= 
]
[img] 
[/img][/url]
Protesting is one thing, setting fire to cars, smashing up shops and intimidating Universities to cancel speeches is something else entirely. If people in white masks had burnt cars on Obama's election I think there would rightly be outrage. Black facemasks against Trump
are ok though it seems.
Travel ban has only been suspended temporarily for those already with visas. Trump will overturn it and/or get Congress to pass a specific law.
the way he has whipped up fear and used it is a very real warning to the rest of the world.
An interesting point. It's long been assumed that Trump's victory, which by definition is also a victory for bigotry, would provide a shot in the arm for Marine Le Pen's presidential ambitions in France.
However I starting to think that Trump's cack-handed authoritarian style, the sheer stupidity of his executive directives, and the fact that he's making the US look ridiculous in the eyes of the world, that it might actually have the opposite effect.
Travel ban has only been suspended temporarily for those already with visas. Trump will overturn it and/or get Congress to pass a specific law.
It's not looking like he can overturn it, he has lost support within his own party on the issue and to pass a law it must first be legal within the constitution. He has already shot himself in the foot by saying he needs 90 days to "work stuff out" he has the time to do that right now - his case for the ban becomes self defeating if he can't come up with good reason or justification for forming a legal policy on this - such as good solid immigration checks which catches out the "bad dudes" but allows the innocent bystanders to pass - like the people who happen to have a passport from one of those countries but have never lived there.
Protesting is one thing, setting fire to cars, smashing up shops and intimidating Universities to cancel speeches is something else entirely.
Again was this the majority or the minority? Given the scale of the protests against the seriously unpopular president it all seemed to go quite peacfully. Mass demonstrations always attract those that want to cause trouble - it doesn't mean they were there for the same political reasons and it should in no way reduce the impact of what was a series of huge and peacful protests.
Again was this the majority or the minority?
I think jambalaya is trying to say that if every single person, out of the 72 million people who didn't vote for Trump, doesn't always behave in an acceptable manner, the protests are worthless.
Well this seems like a sensible compromise :
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38876644 ]Trump calls for 'careful' border checks after travel ban setback[/url]
Presumably dodgy looking geezers turning up with suitcases full of kalashnikovs won't be allowed in.
what you mean exactly what was going on already? The same idea that had stopped or prevented terrorists from those countries reaching the US for the last 8 years?
What a good idea... maybe those intellegance officials might have some useful input
I assume the new "careful now" presidential order which replaces the ban is only for 90 days.
Or as Trump puts it, [i] “until we find out what's going on.”[/i]
Ernie
You appear to have forgotten that was [i]before[/i] the ban
Exactly what I said I supported
Protests after the ban? Nope, just carried on hunting legally (told you before, we even gave the beagles a PowerPoint presentation showing them that chasing rabbits was legal, but hares were not allowed any more)
See, we [i]didn't[/i] resort to pointless protests, we lost, sucked it up and moved on.
See, we didn't resort to pointless protests, we lost, sucked it up and moved on.
But this protest has helped keep the momentum up, pressured people and made sure it has stayed in the public eye while they have takes sensible legal steps to take a legally dubious ruling to court and have it challenged. Seems like a great protest.
Some of the most effective techniques for protest now involve financial protest where you boycott or challenge the revenue streams of large organisations (uninstall Uber for instance) or when movie/TV studios/NFL decided not to go to states that had discriminatory laws on gender.
Given the fact that these things are being debated and kept alive means protesting is working. As is being pointed out the exec orders are likely to come back as illegal.
Anyway back to the point Trump will be happy to present his case with his learning to both the courts and congress to get his ban in place unless he has no evidence for it.
