Your a disgrace Maxtorque would it make you happy if he was ?
I'm normally deeply uncomfortable with such suggestions, because a life is a life. But in this case I'm reasonably confident it would result in a net decrease in human suffering.
Let's just put this one out there:
http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/232856168-story
So Trump's travel ban has already resulted in more deaths than all those caused in the US by terrorists from the 7 countries. A green card holder, hence protected by the constitution it seems. I'm sure somebody is working on his impeachment, this seems like an early candidate.
Hmm linky not worky - is it unsuitable news for Fox?
Try
http://amp.timeinc.net/time/4656182/trump-muslim-ban-woman-died-green-card-immigration/
Hmm linky not worky - is it unsuitable news for Fox?
Fox seemed to have pulled that story. The Time story links to the same place you did and the story still shows up if you search the Fox site for "green card", but when you click on the story it just leads to their home page. 😕
[img] 
[/img]
has already resulted in
Correlation ? Causation
Correlation ? Causation
Yeah, impossible to know if reaching medical treatment in the US would have prevented her death (though according to the story her son believes so).
But if the story is accurate then that was still a US resident, a Green Card holder who has lived there since 1995, the mother of an American Serviceman who served in Iraq, who got turned away, couldn't reach US healthcare and subsequently died.
Surely even you can recognise that is not great.
TBH it's all a bit tenuous. Was she flying home for medical attention, and would it have made a difference? Was she already declining? We don't know how old she was or any background... If as he says his mum was certain she'd die if she stayed in Iraq, why did he leave, that seems weird to me... But otoh it's easy to see how a traumatic experience could make the difference here- and let's not piss about, being told you can't return to your home, and that after 20 years living there, raising kids there, you're suddenly being treated like an alien (that's the actual wording)- especially for someone who's been a refugee before? That could be absolutely crushing.
It's very sad but it's possible that "all" the ban did, was make her last days miserable and make her son miss it. That's the best case scenario and it's still absolutely shit. But it's not "killing people".
Agreed Northwind.
Was she flying home for medical attention
Yes, at least according to the text snippet on the image of that oddly missing Fox story:
[i]"A local business owner flies to Iraq to bring his mother back home to the US for medical treatment"[/i]
But hard to confirm since they seem to have deleted it.
It's very sad but it's possible that "all" the ban did, was make her last days miserable and make her son miss it. That's the best case scenario and it's still absolutely shit. But it's not "killing people".
Yep at worst it's just screwing with people's lives for some petty reasons.
It's very sad but it's possible that "all" the ban did, was make her last days miserable and make her son miss it. That's the best case scenario and it's still absolutely shit. But it's not "killing people".
Agreed. I didn't have a chance to read the whole thing but was anyone else confused by the Son's decision to jump on the plane, leaving his mother to a fate he "knew" would result in her death? I probably missed something, though.
Your a disgrace Maxtorque would it make you happy if he was ?
I have no shame in saying it would make me ecstatically happy if he was assassinated. Live on TV hopefully so we can all replay it on youtube at our leisure. If we're really lucky, our own collaborationist leader might be with him when it happens and take some of the crossfire.
Does seem an odd decision, but the story is pretty light on detail.
It doesn't say [i]he[/i] knew she would die, it says that she knew, if she was sent back to the hospital, that she wouldn't make it.
Perhaps at that point he thought she'd be allowed on a later flight after further checks?
I'd imagine a flight from Iraq to the US isn't all that cheap. He may not have been in a position to just throw it away on the off-chance that she wasn't allowed to travel.
I have no shame in saying it would make me ecstatically happy if he was assassinated.
Then you get Mike Pence in charge, and an enraged public ready to grant the government new powers to strike back.
No thanks!
Then you get Mike Pence in charge
Something tells me if the CIA or whoever got to the extreme effort to do a JFK, they'll take out Pence with him.
and to add having spent a brief 40 minutes waiting at check in leaving NZ to come back home to Oz due to "Passport" problems (immigration had not recorded me leaving properly) even in that innocent situation where the staff were being very helpful to get me on the flight it was exceptionally stressful. I wouldn't want to go through it in a place I did not feel safe or when a lot depending on being on that flight. Or where the staff were trying to get you out.
dazh - MemberSomething tells me if the CIA or whoever got to the extreme effort to do a JFK, they'll take out Pence with him.
It'll be like By Dawn's Early Light, they'll work down the list til we'll end up with some random guy who was never supposed to be in charge of anything more challenging than a pub crawl. Hopefully James Earl Jones is on standby.
some random guy who was never supposed to be in charge of anything more challenging than a pub crawl
[img] 
[/img]
taxi25
Your a disgrace Maxtorque would it make you happy if he was ? This thread has disappeared up it's own arsehole IMHO
Firstly, i never said i supported killing Trump, i simply highlighted it was a possibility. US presidents have been killed or attempted to be killed for far less.
So, would i be happy to see Trump shot, frankly, i'd don't care. He's a nasty piece of work, he doesn't GAS about anyone else but himself and his bank balance. He's degrading to women, racist, bigoted and acts like a 7yo. His "play ground politics" only rubs people up the wrong way and leads to days of name calling rather than positive outcomes. His policies are ill thought out and poorly communicated. To compensate he is gagging the press and freedom of speech.
So, if he gets shot i'm not going to shed a tear no. The world will be a safer, less volatile place without him. Yes, America, and the UK, might be a bit poorer, but you know what, i'm more than happy to exchange some material wealth for some decency and integrity.
(in reality, quite how a greedy man, who's the figurehead of a huge capitalist multinational company (which doesn't pay it's fair share of taxes) that exploits it's workers for his personal gain is going to "give power back to the people" i have no idea)
If Trump is either impeached or voluntarily decides to leave office, we're facing the prospect of President Mike Pence.
I'm reminded of an unkind joke from the late 1980s that Bush snr was guaranteed to avoid an attempt on his life because the prospect of Dan Quayle being left in charge was too terrifying a prospect for anyone to risk doing a Lee Harvey Oswald.
Like it or not, Trump is hugely divisive and seems to be attempting to shut down criticism rather than addressing it head on if his orders to shut down the twitter feed of NASA and Parks & Recreation is anything to go by.
I did get revere-Godwinned in this very thread by someone when I suggested that the rise of the Third Reich should be carefully studied, but at what point do you draw the line? Do you protest after people have had freedom of speech denied, after the publication of peer review science has been supressed - and I refer directly to the influence that Trump's cabinet is attempting to lever upon NASA etc - or the legions of Putinesque keyboard warriors who scour the internet for derogatory comments about Trump and post abuse on social media - as recently happened when Singletrack posted on Facebook gently mocking Trump and suggesting his support for regressive bottom bracket standards.
Id put it 50:50 on him being shot dead in the next 3 weeks...........
Id happily admit i'd be happy. Especially if it saves one innocent refugee from persecution, whos life I would value many times more.
What the AG should have done is fight the actions in court and let them decide based upon the law. She knew she was going and just did something for show / raise her profile.
Wasn't she going to have to defend trumps actions in court however, rather than fight them? I thought the refusal to do this was the reason she got sacked. So a woman standing up for her principles is a bad thing?
I did get revere-Godwinned in this very thread by someone when I suggested that the rise of the Third Reich should be carefully studied, but at what point do you draw the line? Do you protest after people have had freedom of speech denied, after the publication of peer review science has been supressed - and I refer directly to the influence that Trump's cabinet is attempting to lever upon NASA etc
The comparison with 1930's Germany is completely incorrect. The political system were very different.
The US system is designed to prevent the President having too much power.
The Senate, House of Representatives and the Supreme Court have a great deal of power and can stop the President from pushing much through, look at Obama.
The AG was going to be replaced anyway. She would not have been able to defend herself in court.
By taking her stand, she knew she would be sacked but she also knew it would draw a lot more attention to the case.
She did very well.
The comparison with 1930's Germany is completely incorrect. The political system were very different.The US system is designed to prevent the President having too much power.
Noted.
But my point was that at what point we decide that policies which blatantly supress truth and freedom of speech become offensive to one's own sensibilities.
did this just slip off the first page for the first time? thought the roaster had had it nuked! fear not, problem solved!
Have you discussed Univision and the ongoing court case yet?
Interesting that one of their reporters was chucked out of a press conference today, and the reporter who has US citizenship was told to
"Get out of my Country"
That wasn't today. It was ages ago. Just went viral today.nickc - MemberHave you discussed Univision and the ongoing court case yet?
Interesting that one of their reporters was chucked out of a press conference today, and the reporter who has US citizenship was told to
"Get out of my Country"
ah, right, couldn't be arsed to search, this thread needs footnotes and indexing
The US system is designed to prevent the President having too much power.
Though one of the big issues right now are his apparent attempts to circumvent some of that (which should be the bigger story, but is being ignored behind the immediate issues)
gobuchul
The comparison with 1930's Germany is completely incorrect.
not completely incorrect no.
In both cases, a strong, single minded, outspoken leader talked a depressed, politically disengaged population, one small step at a time, into accepting "single point" decisions (ie, decisions not passed through the system of democracy in place at the time, but just coming from that leader). In both cases, Freedom of speech was the first victim, where people were blocked, either by actual physical action or through the fear of possibly retaliation, from airing their views. And in both cases, the media became a biased mouth piece from that leader.
Despite being nearly 100 years ago, the similarities are STRIKING and un-deniable.
(NOTE: No one is saying Trump is a Nazi, or similar sensationalist rubbish, but there are significant similarities between the rise and methods of the early Nazi party and Trumps actions today.)
I think I've posted this on here before, but I suspect lots of people haven't read it:
maxtorque - Member
not completely incorrect no.
Of course you are absolutely wrong with that description. 😛
How many dictators did you have in EU over the 100 years?
Where did the two World Wars started?
How many dictators have you seen coming from America?
Did the two World Wars started in the land of the free, America?
😆
Land of the free, which has the highest rate of incarceration in the world
I'll obviously regret it but here goes, so only countries that have previously had dictators can have dictators and world wars can't start in different places because? Chewkw just because something hasn't happened before doesn't mean it can't happen.
I'll obviously regret it but here goes,
How's that regret going? Feel good?
Chewkw just because something hasn't happened before doesn't mean it can't happen.
Which presumably explains why you are attempting to have a sensible discussion with Chewwy.
The comparison with 1930's Germany is completely incorrect.
Agree. He's more like the Social Democrats who preceded Hitler. Inept, hated by everyone, blamed for everything and utterly failing to get his message out.
According to Dan Carlin Hitler had a private army a million strong before he was in government at a time when the German Government had a limit of 100,000. Trump couldn't even get 100,000 people to clap him at his inauguration, let alone an army!
Amazing stuff: Sean Spicer appears to have used the Quebec shooting as proof that The Donald's Muslim Ban is a good idea ?!
“It’s a terrible reminder of why we must remain vigilant. And why the president is taking steps to be proactive, not reactive,’’ Spicer said Monday.
WTF?!
So a French-Canadian (who likes Trump and Le Pen on Facebook) guns down six muslims while they are praying at their mosque. And Spicer basically says "See that's why we can't let them in".
Just wow.
(Apologies if this has been done already. Just getting caught up)
"See that's why we can't let them in".
It's obviously for their own safety. Lots of crazy guys with guns in the States.
I wonder how much money America is going to lose in tourism because of trump?
It's obviously for their own safety. Lots of crazy guys with guns in the States.
Which is, I believe, a direct rip off of the law in some Arab states. If you weren't in the country, the accident wouldn't have happened. 😕
So a French-Canadian (who likes Trump and Le Pen on Facebook) guns down six muslims while they are praying at their mosque. And Spicer basically says "See that's why we can't let them in".
Well given fox news managed to get Moroccan into the first reports its no surprise. (until the Canadian pm's office got on to them and pointed out they were dicks)
Like reading back through some posts in here the flips and spins from Spicer are incredible especially when strung together, you have to wonder of he is enjoying it
That comment by Spicer was made a couple of days ago after a Moroccan born man had been arrested and a fuller picture hadn't been established.
Bigots rely heavily on knee-jerk reactions. I would say that it was an honest mistake that any bigot could have made.
Trump reportedly preparing papers for his run in 2020. Smart move shows he in the job for the long term.
@outofbreath even the most pessimistic estimates for the inauguration where around 300,000
jambalaya - Member
Trump reportedly preparing papers for his run in 2020.
so he can start taking donations
hes all about the $$$
Trump will be impeached before too long
He's all about the ego. That's why he's preparing for 2020
Well given fox news managed to get Moroccan into the first reports its no surprise
Right so basically #fakenews then?
I'm sure Spicer called Fox on that one and publicly corrected his own mistake?
Trump reportedly preparing papers for his run in 2020. Smart move shows he in the job for the long term.
Why is it a smart move? If he was really smart he would try to calm down the ever growing opposition to him by heavily hinting that he might not aim for a second term.
What btw does "preparing papers" for his re-election in 2020 involve?
I see GatewayPundit has a list and screenshots of the liberal MSM that "failed" to report the shooter shouted "Allahu Akbar", unlike them, Fox and Breitbart.
Because it "apparently doesn’t help the narrative that they are trying to push" 😕
#fakenews much?
hes all about the $$$
I doubt it. I very much doubt that his presidential ambitions ever had anything to do with money. I think Molgrips comment it closer.
By showing his intention to run for 2020 it means (shamelessly cut n' pasted)
It means that 501c3 (non-profit) organizations cannot work or speak negatively about the President, who would of course be “candidate” Trump. If they do, it is considered opposition to a candidate, and grounds for losing the group’s tax exempt status.
This makes nonprofits’ political strategy for the next few years dicey to say the least. If they want to defeat Trump’s policies, they need to figure out how to do it without “campaigning.” No more Planned Parenthood rallies claiming Trump is against women’s healthcare, when their real goal is abortion promotion. Legally, however, nonprofits working for Trump are limited in their “campaign” efforts as well. But remember, President Trump has the bully pulpit.
Sly move eh?, alongside his appointment of Bannon to the national security council I fear what he's done so far is small change compared to what is coming over the next few years
It means that 501c3 (non-profit) organizations cannot work or speak negatively about the President, who would of course be “candidate” Trump. If they do, it is considered opposition to a candidate, and grounds for losing the group’s tax exempt status.
Ah, I didn't realise that this was the case in the land which values free speech so highly.
Statement on Iran. Recently test fired a missle with "Israel must be destroyed" written on the side
Thanks for that jambalaya. I know we shouldn't be surprised but I still find it staggering that a US national security advisor should have both the nerve and hypocrisy to stand before TV cameras and accuse Iran of [i]"destabilising behaviour across the entire Middle East"[/i]
Trump 2020 is all about thr $$, his campaign heavily funneled cash through his businesses for hotels, planes etc. doing this allows him another revenue stream. Cynical ploy and really goes down to the main reason he wanted the job, the bottom line.
Trump couldn't even get 100,000 people to clap him at his inauguration, let alone an army!
@outofbreath even the most pessimistic estimates for the inauguration where around 300,000
Who said they were all there supporting him?
The same man who brought his own cheer leaders to every event he does (first press meeting was filled with (paid?) friends who whoop and holler at everything he said.
If this is a taste of what is to come then when he starts his pro isreal/anti iran policies in ernest then the world will really shake.
"Israel must be wiped out/destroyed" was written in Hebrew on an Iranian missile that was tested back on 9 march 2016, not the missile tested yesterday.
Oh and on the Isreal thing, finally we had a US that was willing to put limits on their agression and illegal actions and now they have a free pass. That and the agression from Trump towards Iran is only going one way. You can't back one side or the other in this case, you have to back and chastise both. Strangly it's what was happening with Iran being rewarded for making prgress and Isreal being penalised for not. as I have said many times before nearly anywhere else and there would have been blue helmets on the borders and a way to keep the Israli military on their side of the border and the paistinians on thiers. Instead we have legalisation of building in occupied teritories which has the sole purpose of making the borders further out and changing the balance in the region again in favour of Isreal.
Not been following this thread as frankly there's enough about the wotsit hitler in the news without willingly reading it here. However, it's amusing to see that May isn't the only foreign leader to be totally bent over by him:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-02/trump-slams-dumb-refugee-deal/8235820
I have to agree with Trump that it's a dumb deal - Australia should be allowing these wretched people in here rather than off-loading them to the other side of the world. However, it is an interesting lens through which you can observe just how clueless Trump actually is. I think it's pretty clear he was almost unaware of the deal prior to the shortened phone call, and Spicer thought the refugees were all from PNG so they wouldn't be affected by the travel ban. Absolutely mind-bogglingly clueless...
and another interesting part is which of the 3 Amigo's decided to leak the details of how the call went? I guess that means anyone is free to share Trump's words now?
In the room during the call were Mr Trump's chief strategist Stephen Bannon, press secretary Sean Spicer and national security adviser Michael Flynn.
and another interesting part is which of the 3 Amigo's decided to leak the details of how the call went? I guess that means anyone is free to share Trump's words now?
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that the leak came from down here...
@outofbreath even the most pessimistic estimates for the inauguration where around 300,000
My bad, I guessed the number, I should have checked. It doesn't affect the point I was making though.
Can't be bothered to check if this has already been posted, but in the interests of fairness a petition to debate Trumps state visit being allowed, rather than banned.
[url= https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844 ]https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844[/url]
So debating something that's already happening, short debate I guess.
'So should Trump have a state visit?'
'He is'
'Oh, so why are we here?'
To think by the time this list was compiled, Trump hadn't even threatened Australia yet....
[img] 
[/img]
So debating something that's already happening, short debate I guess.
The next petition will presumably be "Have I go too much time on my hands"
So countries he's threatened so far, Mexico, Iran, Australia, China and....Must be more than that. I've said it before but it's worth repeating.. Bawbag.
Yeah but that's all just stuff he's doing to distract attention from the bad stuff he's doing.
I must have missed something - is he already here?
Next we shall be cancelling debates on climate change and immigration because they're "already happening"
I don't think you need to specify 'bad' stuff as there's no good stuff interlaced betwixt poorly thought out tantrums/policies.
Aracer, I think a debate about not making a state visit will encompass all the points a debate about making it a state visit would, debates tend to cover both sides by definition so a secondary debate would be pointless.
Have we done this?
Over the past few days as i watch the presidency degenerate into a comedic (albeit frightening) farce i've found myself turning to the only sane voice regarding US politics, it's a damn shame he blew the back of his head off with a gun but perhaps he had a premonition of what was to come........or perhaps he was just a drug addled ornery old bastard but i feel we need a bit of light relief so here's a few select quotes from what i consider to be his greatest work - Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72
Hunter.....I miss you.....you cantankerous old bastard.
[i]“The whole framework of the presidency is getting out of hand. It's come to the point where you almost can't run unless you can cause people to salivate and whip on each other with big sticks. You almost have to be a rock star to get the kind of fever you need to survive in American politics.”
? Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72
“The main problem in any democracy is that crowd-pleasers are generally brainless swine who can go out on a stage & whup their supporters into an orgiastic frenzy—then go back to the office & sell every one of the poor bastards down the tube for a nickel apiece.”
? Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72
“How low do you have to stoop in this country to be President?”
? Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72[/i]
I could quote many more but i shall spend my day off from work drinking whisky, smoking fine weed and seeing solace in his work
wonder what the man behind the throne (Bannon) has planned for foreign affairs?
https://soundcloud.com/breitbart/breitbart-news-daily-lee-edwards-march-10-2016 😯
Have we done this?
To be fair, much as it pains me, anyone, even with some kind of journo accreditation, would be chucked out of a White House press conference if they stand up out of turn and just start haranguing the president.
Can't disagree with the general thrust of his non-question, though.
edit: what he ^ said
[quote=martinhutch ]Have we done this?
To be fair, much as it pains me, anyone, even with some kind of journo accreditation, would be chucked out of a White House press conference if they stand up out of turn and just start haranguing the president.
Can't disagree with the general thrust of his non-question, though.
It's Trump's manner that's the issue.
It's Trump's manner that's the issue.
Precisely.
How much better if he were to apologise to the person whose question was interrupted, then take and answer the question he was posing, and then go back and answer the original one again.
But pulling a face, looking away and doing the childish 'I can't see you so you're not there' thing......
Oh and on the Isreal thing, finally we had a US that was willing to put limits on their agression and illegal actions and now they have a free pass.
Even if the 'illegal' bit were true, what exactly did Obama do in his [u]eight years[/u] in office to rein in Israel, e.g. The massive ground invasion of the Gaza Strip in 2014 or the flotilla raid in 2010?
He even waited until Hillary had lost before suddenly turning pro-Palestine at the UN and giving them $200m - and you can guarantee that wouldn't have happened if she had won.
Oh, and on the charities thing - snopes has already called it:
http://www.snopes.com/trump-filed-reelection-stop-political-speech-nonprofits/
[quote=akira ]I think a debate about not making a state visit will encompass all the points a debate about making it a state visit would
Ah, sorry, was missing the point. But that's apparently exactly what they're doing - they're going to cover both petitions in the same debate (also a point I suspect the author of the petition in favour of a state visit was missing, but then they don't appear to be the smartest cookie).
A reasonable post ninfan - thank you, though I note the following in the snopes article:
He added the caveat: "That’s assuming Trump obeys the law."
Illegal bit? got to be one or two in there
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_assassinations#2010s
So apart from that why is going fully pro Israel and taking on Iran and provoking the rest of the middle east going to do?
I know you are unable to judge anything in the present but give it a go some days
trouble with [url= http://www.snopes.com/queen-sword-trump/ ]snopes.com[/url] is they take the daily mash seriously 😉