[Closed] Donald! Trump!

Isn't he making a lot of these changes as Executive Orders?

I don't understand the American legal/political framework enough to know how they work but it seems like they carry some legal weight.

I don't understand the American legal/political framework enough to know how they work but it seems like they carry some legal weight.

They can be implemented during his term, but they are not law and can be rescinded by the next President...

By the way, I've found that I JUST CAN'T STAND listening to that hideous voice sliming out all over the room from the TV every time he opens his rancid face hole... I have to attend to what he says in newsprint or second-hand reportage because his voice just makes my skin crawl.

Any body else get this, or is it just me?

outofbreath - Member

He clearly thinks he's powerless and can say what he likes and then blame Congress/Senate when it doesn't end up as law.

Thus winning votes with Rednecks without doing any significant harm.

Someone should tell him he's already the president.

he's fine to resort to war crimes and defiance of the Geneva Convention?

You've read the Geneva conventions, right?

You understand the difference between those who are recognised as lawful combatants, and protected under the Geneva conventions, and those who are not, right?

Or are you knee jerk mouthing off about something using phrases that you've head of but don't understand?

Which ones can we waterboard ninfan? You buying the buckets?

By the way, I've found that I JUST CAN'T STAND listening to that hideous voice sliming out all over the room from the TV every time he opens his rancid face hole... I have to attend to what he says in newsprint or second-hand reportage because his voice just makes my skin crawl.

Any body else get this, or is it just me?

A weird as this is to admit, when he's scripted I find his voice really relaxing in a kind of ASMR way.

When he's speaking off the cuff the words are too embarrassing to be relaxing.

I'm with you 100% on that one Wopster. Its like nails down a blackboard to me too. I deliberately avoided all TV and radio news for the day of his inauguration, and the 2 days afterwards. So I know what he said because I read it, but I just can't bring myself to listen to it. I can't stand watching his mannerisms when he speaks either. Those movements with his creepy, tiny little hands.

This....

[img] [/img]

Makes my skin crawl

"I hope you're right fella."

Time will tell.

Which ones can we waterboard ninfan? You buying the buckets?

What you probably missed, just reading the headlines in the guardian and morning star like you do, is that he said it was a decision for his defence staff, and that for example General Matiss didn't think it worked, that others disagreed and though it did, but that he would follow the lead of his experts

Imagine, a president who listened to the advice of the experts and let them lead the decisions - who would have thought that was a bad thing?

The Geneva convention can be side-stepped even in armed combat, for example Afghanistan and the Taliban, simply because it is an agreement between states, and if you do not recognise your opponent in this way, for example ISIS, then the protections of the GC do not apply to combatants.

The UN Convention on Torture which the US signed in the 80s is not quite as simple to dodge, hence the use of foreign installations so the US can pay lip service to meeting its requirements while torturing the crap out of whoever they fancy. But with a president who is a vocal advocate of waterboarding, I'm not sure how long that particular charade can go on.

The US can, and will do what it wants, claiming to be a humane democracy while doing the precise opposite in some hellhole prison in north Africa.

You understand the difference between those who are recognised as lawful combatants, and protected under the Geneva conventions, and those who are not, right?

Or to write it a little differently he promised it all the way round his campaign, got elected wants to do it but nobody in their right mind will allow it. His appointments had to categorically state they would do no such thing then he goes on tv and still says he wants to. He knew when he did the interview they said they wouldn't do it so why say you want to?

Or are you knee jerk mouthing off about something using phrases that you've head of but don't understand?

Maybe. Just like you're knee-jerk trolling by saying something that makes you look like you support torture but is sufficiently ambiguous to allow you to walk away from it if challenged.

So those not covered under the Geneva Convention as lawful combatants are what? Criminals I suppose since they are presumably civilian and have committed crimes (which as I recall is how the IRA were looked upon during the troubles). Is it OK to torture civilian criminals?

IIRC they are not even criminals since they have not been convicted of any crime, and suspected criminals are guaranteed a fair court hearing. Maybe they are sort of "alternative criminals".

Ninfan: a decade in the Army (and counting) gives me a bit more knowledge about this than just reading headlines.

hence the use of foreign installations so the US can pay lip service to meeting its requirements

while torturing the crap out of whoever they fancy.

sufficiently ambiguous

Ninfan: a decade in the Army (and counting) gives me a bit more knowledge about this than just reading headlines.

Yeah, but Ninfan watches Infowars, so is much more qualified than you.

No funny picture Ninfan?

[quote=mrblobby ]U
Without the scrutiny of the legislature and the courts, and outside the public eye, Obama is authorizing murder on a weekly basis, with a discussion of the guilt or innocence of candidates for the "kill list" being resolved in secret on "Terror Tuesday" teleconferences with administration officials and intelligence officials.

The thought of what Trump might do with this very uneven playing field is more terrifying than any terrorist threat.

^this

There's no doubt Obama would have been applying some restraint with the drone stuff, and is not a decision he would have taken lightly.

Trump will be all "pew pew die die"

Wonderful Alpha, then you'll know very well that GC don't extend to domestic or foreign terrorists, and the importance of words like perfidious.

Imagine, a president who listened to the advice of the experts and let them lead the decisions - who would have thought that was a bad thing?

That would be a great thing, you just missed out the tiny little detail of him only listening to the experts who say things he already agrees with...

He's certainly not listening to, or letting experts lead things in other areas is he?

You understand the difference between those who are recognised as lawful combatants, and protected under the Geneva conventions, and those who are not, right?

If you'd rather get into the legal minutiae of whether the people you are at war with are at properly at war with you, rather than the harder ethical/moral discussion then okay. I'm sure lawyers can generate some wiggle room there, they did in the past.

Of course there are the issues of the:

- [url= http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ ]Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 5)[/url]
- [url= http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx ]International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 7)[/url]
- [url= http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx ]UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment[/url]
- [url= https://dontbeadickday.com/ ]Wheaton's Law[/url]

And of course the [url= https://www.icc-cpi.int/nr/rdonlyres/ea9aeff7-5752-4f84-be94-0a655eb30e16/0/rome_statute_english.pdf ]Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court[/url] which defines torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as war crimes under Article 8 (2 a ii, iii & xxi and 2 c i & ii), and as crimes against humanity under Article 7 (1 f & k).

So torture, registration for certain groups, control of the media, camps to put certain people in and mass deportations. Think I've heard this tune before, so far trump's presidency has been disgusting.

That would be a great thing, you just missed out the tiny little detail of him only listening to the experts who say thing he agrees with...

Apparently there are a lot of "experts" that reckon waterboarding works - they just don't seem to talk to anyone else.
Bit like listening to the FBI an CIA about interference in the election - I guess he only started to say nice things when a couple of hundred highly trained eyes were staring at him, or maybe somebody left a memo out called 10 best ways to kill a president when he had his tour.

The only ambiguity is whether water boarding meets the legal definition of Torture.

The only people for whom there is any ambiguity over this are those who are actively seeking it and hiding behind phrases such as 'enhanced interrogation techniques'.

Does anyone really think that the act of putting a cloth over the mouth of a restrained person, then pouring water on it in such a ways as to deliver the sensation of drowning, is not subjecting them to severe pain and suffering?

Define severe

Tell you what we will get the water and a cloth and you pop round for a go. You an give us your experience. Though if it works you will just tell us what we want to hear so it stops. If you don't we will carry on till you do. Sound fair?

Define severe

Now do that day in, day out, hundreds of times, with no way to stop it.

if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/horrific-sensation-drowning-after-trumps-9696333

Sounds pretty trivial to me.

ignoring the moral element it is ineffective as mikes notes as you will start saying things just to get it to stop

Its just pointless it gives information which is utterly unreliable and leaves you morally compromised for the manner in which you obtained it

Personally I dont think i would support it even it was effective whilst it is not then the only reason to support it is because you are the sort of person who thinks its ok to torture people.

Torture is illegal and doesnt work.

Surprised by Mays comments in the HoC yesterday. We are guilty of torture too.

ignoring the moral element it is ineffective as mikes notes as you will start saying things just to get it to stop

Its just pointless it gives information which is utterly unreliable and leaves you morally compromised for the manner in which you obtained it

Well, I broadly agree, and that's General Matiss' point, and undoubtedly why Trump respected his judgement enough to let him make the decision

But that doesn't really anwer the question as to whether it is or isn't illegal torture does it?

Would be interesting to hear Jack Straws comments on some of these issues...

ninfan - Member
Define severe

Starts to clarify where his support comes from...

Can we waterboard ninfan to see if he thinks it is severe?

Torture is defined by the UN Convention against Torture, which the US has signed, as "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person" in order to get information.
The US legal code defines torture as an action "specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering", while the US Constitution bans "cruel and unusual punishment".

Of course waterboarding when it was being employed was merely an "enhanced interrogation technique" wasn't it?

Reporter - What about waterboarding?
Trump - I'm talking about information gathering methods with my experts. This includes waterboarding but I won't make any statement until I've considered their advice

Not sure what is more disturbing in that video:
Donald Trump's words or the sound of ninfan's aroused breathing.

Have we done this yet? The Netherlands welcomes Donald Trump:

http://mashable.com/2017/01/24/netherlands-trump-viral-video/#YutsXbfXMOqZ

The Indy has a fun story about Trump staffers using private servers 😆

Have we covered his daughter and chief adviser being registered to vote in two different states yet, I believe trump calls that voter fraud.

He's a ****in nutjob and to hear a US president advocate Torturing people is scary.

Even allowing for him being full of shite and never actually doing it what kind of message does it send to all the other nutjobs who might.

It a ****s charter.

he has alternative facts to explain that one

ninfan - Member

But that doesn't really anwer the question as to whether it is or isn't illegal torture does it?

What would legal torture be?

Putting someone in prison for 20 years.

IIRC its what you do after a legal kidnapping

Oh good apparently Mrs May is going present The Donald with a quaich.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-38756197

"The gift of an engraved quaich reflects the US President's Scottish ancestry"

I wonder what they engraved it with.
Hopefully [url= https://www.buzzfeed.com/hilarywardle/custard-flavoured-jobby ]some messages from the people of Scotland[/url].

oops :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/26/donald-trump-still-using-personal-android-phone-despite-potential/

Lol. As "proof", they say:

[i]"Despite being issued with a National Security Agency-made "hardened" phone, Trump's social media activity indicates he is still using an Android. The NSA devices, which are secured with biometric authentication, are restricted to only downloading secure apps from the Defense Information Systems Agency's store. It is highly unlikely that Trump could download Twitter onto such a device."[/i]

I wonder how Obama managed to use Twitter for all that time then?

Maybe Obama had a computer....

Meanwhile his press secretary has accidentally tweeted his password, two days in a row.

I'm just going to leave [url= https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2017/01/24/the-true-correct-story-of-what-happened-at-donald-trumps-inauguration/ ]this[/url] here. Apologies if it's been done already, but I can't face trawling back through the swamp.

Not sure why he'd feel a need to do that at this point though

Enrange the masses whilst pushing through thoughtless changes to enrich your swamp dwelling fossil fuel buddies

[quote=BadlyWiredDog ]I'm just going to leave this here. Apologies if it's been done already, but I can't face trawling back through the swamp.

Donald Trump’s beautiful big family was there. His favorite childhood dog was there, too, back from the farm where he still lives to this day.

😆

[quote=ninfan ]
I wonder how Obama managed to use Twitter for all that time then?

I wonder how you're allowed out the house without adult supervision.

I refer the honourable gentlemen to the reply I gave some moments ago:

[i]What is it about lefties that whenever they can't win on the points they resort to personal insults? I thought being 'progressive' and standing for social justice and equality meant you were all better than that, and that's why you were all able to maintain the righteous moral high ground? Turns out that it's just a skin deep facade...[/i]

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/donald-trump/page/133#post-8241001

[quote=ninfan ]I refer the honourable gentlemen to the reply I gave some moments ago:
What is it about lefties that whenever they can't win on the points they resort to personal insults? I thought being 'progressive' and standing for social justice and equality meant you were all better than that, and that's why you were all able to maintain the righteous moral high ground? Turns out that it's just a skin deep facade...
> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/donald-trump/page/133#post-8241001
br />

Can you honestly not work out Obama's method of tweeting vs Chump's?

I refer the honourable gentlemen to the reply I gave some moments ago:

You really are struggling 😆

Which justifies the abusive tantrum how?

🙄

Lefties: (sweary warning)

REEEEEE! 😀

Lefties:

Righties

I know which side I'm happy to be on

[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]

Well, That's what happens when you leave the lab kit out...

https://mobile.twitter.com/autumpatrice/status/823164742646845444

So the Mexican president has snubbed The Trumpet. Somewhat unsurprisingly.

Hope nobody has got any Holidays in Mexico booked....

[img] [/img]

he cannot afford the cost due to having to pay for a wall

So the Mexican president has snubbed The Trumpet. Somewhat unsurprisingly.

More #fakenews? - Trump told him that if he wasn't going to pay then cancel the meeting.

won't they pay through a reduction of aid that goes to Mexico?

US gives about 50million dollars in aid to Mexico annually. Cancelling that entirely means the wall should be paid for in about 80 years. Assuming the estimates of a 4bn bill are correct. Sad!

Lefties: (sweary warning)

There we go - it wasn't really a ninfan afternoon without at least one hilarious picture, was it?

Wall will cost $20bn+ accordingly to a few building experts. So it'll be paid for in about 400 years.

Are you including the increased maintenance and staffing costs, plus the boosted Coast Guard resource needed to stem the Carribean migrant route?

There we go - it wasn't really a ninfan afternoon without at least one hilarious picture, was it?

It wasn't a picture...

Despite what ninfan claims torture is completely illegal under US law. Which of course is precisely why torture has taken place in Guantanamo Bay Cuba away from the jurisdiction of US courts - they don't take prisoners to Cuba for the sunshine and the beaches.

Or else they kidnap them and torture them in another country which is friendly with the US, [i]extraordinary rendition[/i] is a fancy term which sounds harmless and means exactly that.

I can't say I've noticed anyone mentioning the International Court of Justice btw, we really need to move from this mindset which thinks that such things don't apply to the US governments/presidents.

If the Unites States isn't complying with international law then we should be talking about sanctions, including sanctions targeted at individuals with their overseas assets frozen.

Sure, there's no realistic likelihood of sanctions being imposed on the US and Trump, but we should at least be talking about it. It's only by talking about things that even the vaguest possibility can be considered.

US governments/presidents are not God's chosen people, their belief that they can do whatever they like with complete impunity is not acceptable.

EDIT : Just to be clear UK governments, including so-called 'Labour governments', don't have a blemish free record when it comes to torture. And I don't think the fact that George Bush was a bit more secretive than Trump about his fondness for torture somehow makes it more acceptable.

Quite a few vacancies in the State Department now after the entire senior management team resigned.

would be cheaper to mine the border lol

Quite a few vacancies in the State Department now after the entire senior management team resigned.

Were they part of the swamp?

How is the remodelling of Mt Trumpmore going?

So, the media pettiness continues.Do you wave when you get on a plane? I am sure Washington and Adams didn't either.Bother you?

@poah amd @akira I posted an example earlier of how it might be paid for.

Mexicans (I assume) send $25bn per anum back to Mexico from the US, the vast majority in smaller cash amounts and often through money senders like Western Union that do not require ID. A charge of 5% (no more than money transfers already charge) would yield $1.25bn pa. Wall estimate is $14bn. A daily visa charge to enter the US, 1 million Mexicans cross daily. Renegotiation / cancelling NAFTA with tarifs used for wall.

kerley - Member

Were they part of the swamp?

A side story to watch- CNN reports they were fired, officials quoted as saying it's part of "clearing house".

Quite a few vacancies in the State Department now after the entire senior management team resigned.

US system is different to ours, they are not civil service but political appointees, a new President would expect to make 5000 appointments. Trump fired all tye Ambassadors which in of itself isn't unusual, just normally replacements are lined up first. Trump just didn't bother except for Israel, UK and UN

One for science fans…

https://twitter.com/ap/status/824374557893083146

BREAKING: Trump administration mandating EPA scientific studies, data undergo review by political staff before public release.

Jambalaya, does trump have the ability to do that though. Most of the orders he's been flinging out haven't had any research behind them, Obama had a few weeks of changes and lawyers going over stuff to make sure the orders he did were legal and possible. These details seem not to bother trump though