Inauguration Day LOL!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lt. Bob said:
right .... they're trying to shut down any negative press .... oh wait, they aren't
Click to expand...

Just remember, you get to try again in three years. By what I can tell, the Dems better start looking now, not much of a bench. Maybe the Dems can pad someone's resume like they tried with Hillary.

Good luck :thumbs up: I hope for your sake your party wins, I don't think you could take another loss.
 
Funny to me that we're having riots and negative worldwide press because he wants to shut down Syrian refugees and hold some of the terrorist nations at bay for 3 or 4 months...Obama did the same thing to Iraq for 6 months and no one batted an eye.
 
BroKen_H said:
Funny to me that we're having riots and negative worldwide press because he wants to shut down Syrian refugees and hold some of the terrorist nations at bay for 3 or 4 months...Obama did the same thing to Iraq for 6 months and no one batted an eye.
Click to expand...

Nope. Not the same thing. The difference is that Obama never issued a ban, and he was responding to an actual realized threat, whereas Trump advocated a Muslim ban on the campaign trail and these current explanations are nothing more than a pretext to implement it.

The “Kentucky case” refers to two Iraqis in Kentucky who in May 2011 were arrested and faced federal terrorism charges after officials discovered from an informant that Waad Ramadan Alwan, before he had been granted asylum in the United States, had constructed improvised roadside bombs in Iraq. The FBI, after examining fragments from thousands of bomb parts, found Alwan’s fingerprints on a cordless phone that had been wired to detonate an improvised bomb in 2005.

The arrests caused an uproar in Congress and the Obama administration pledged to re-examine the records of 58,000 Iraqis who had been settled in the United States. The administration also imposed new, more extensive background checks on Iraqi refugees. Media reports at the time focused on how the new screening procedures had delayed visa approvals, even as the United States was preparing to end its involvement in the Iraq War.
Click to expand...

You should read this entire article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...y-625pm:homepage/story&utm_term=.9d2a0e8d9bb7

BTW I've not heard of any "riots" over this. Do you have a link?
 
BroKen_H said:
Funny to me that we're having riots and negative worldwide press because he wants to shut down Syrian refugees and hold some of the terrorist nations at bay for 3 or 4 months...Obama did the same thing to Iraq for 6 months and no one batted an eye.
Click to expand...

Because they were different things maybe? Obama's administration stopped processing Iraqi registrations for 6 months in response to a defined security issue with the programme identified by the FBI. This is policy on the hoof from Trump who even caught out his own party with the announcement and it's on a much bigger scale and to appease his supporters rather than respond to a specific threat.

The widely published graphic where countries included/excluded from the ban are overlaid with the countries Trump does/doesn't have business interests with says it all.

He's not fooling anyone and not doing anything to appease valid concerns that he's going to spend the next four years being reckless and impulsive. Presidency by tweet...
 
The press has all of a sudden grown some balls and are now questioning power. Hm, wonder what has changed?

The press is reporting that it hasn't been immigrants who have committed terrorist acts here in recent times. Partially accurate. However, there is one common factor in persons who have planned and acted-out terrorist attacks (or "work related incidents") in recent years here in the US.

Of the two San Bernardino attackers, one was born here in the US. The other married into this country from living in Saudi Arabia and then going to Pakistan "to study". Her relatives say she had become devout, and radicalized. It's a shame the vetting process didn't prevent her from entering the country to take part in an attack which killed 14 people, injuring 22 others. Apparently, at least at the time, the vetting process did not include the simple task of taking a look at both jihadists internet activity.

No foreigner from any country is entitled to enter this country. Nope. Through struggle and conflict, wars and human suffering, it took The West many many years to reach this level of for the most part peaceful and cooperative civilized existence. It's time the middle east did the same. Or, fuck 'em.

Studies have shown that an unsettling number people of a certain religious affiliation have viewpoints and beliefs incompatible with civilized societies. If studies have shown over 70% of Egyptians believe someone should be prosecuted for drawing what they deem as a sinful cartoon, should we be accepting anyone from Egypt to live in this country? To put it in perspective, that's over 700 of every thousand entering into a representative republic. Opposition to cartoons barely scratches the surface of fucked up beliefs. And Egypt is not even on the list. Yeah, they in the mideast and northern africa need to stay there and sort that shit out, it doesn't belong here.

I might add, fuck the bleeding hearts. For them, "piss Jesus" is self expression and art, cartoons of bomb turban Mohammed are offensive and hate speech.
 
Mick Doobie said:
Of the two San Bernardino attackers, one was born here in the US. The other married into this country from living in Saudi Arabia and then going to Pakistan "to study". Her relatives say she had become devout, and radicalized. It's a shame the vetting process didn't prevent her from entering the country to take part in an attack which killed 14 people, injuring 22 others. Apparently, at least at the time, the vetting process did not include the simple task of taking a look at both jihadists internet activity.
Click to expand...

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are not on Trump's list, so the San Bernadino case is actually not relevant to Trump's executive order.

Neither is 9/11.

Are you able to explain why the countries with citizens who actually attacked us are not on the list?
 
I am waiting for the Ban on Americans travelling to some countries? What would happen to American oil if all the middle east countries banded americans from entering? Or is this why some countries are exempt from the ban. Money rules, only the poor countries are banded. America only ever interfered with the middle east because they wanted the oil, they would never have gone there if there had been no oil. You reap what you sow.
 
Mick Doobie said:
...should we be accepting anyone from Egypt to live in this country?
Click to expand...

ibleedburgundy said:
Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are not on Trump's list
Click to expand...

and neither is Egypt. But, this shows that many Trump supporters are just not thinking the actual "ban" through. Mick's entire post had nothing to do with the nations named and everything to do with the one's that weren't. Mick, this is the whole point many are upset about.
 
witzendoz said:
You reap what you sow.
Click to expand...
The only country on that list that we haven't bombed is Iran.

Where was the media outrage when we were bombing those countries? Where were the protests when we were bombing those countries?

Of course there will be people with hatred towards us who could become "terrorists" if they've had their country destroyed and friends and family killed.

The list of countries, by the way, is not Trump's doing. That list was made by the Obama administration.

Saudi Arabia has too much money tied up in the US for Obama to ever put them on the list, and Egypt had been receiving money to play nice with Israel.


So yeah, if we the US, bomb the shit out of people in muslim countries, it is reasonable to assume that people from those countries might be hostile to the United States.

Blame Bush and Obama.
Trump didn't bomb them. He just instituted a temporary immigration ban. Other presidents in the past have done the same thing, including Obama.
 
Bravo to the Republican media for getting out the disinformation on this issue. I have now heard from three different Republicans on three different forums about how Obama banned Iraqi refugees for 6 Months in 2011. That flat out did not happen.

I am seeing a few Republican news sources reporting it that way - Breitbart, the Federalist, the Gateway Pundit. What I find odd is how all three of them could get the story completely wrong in precisely the same way...unless it is a coordinated effort.
 
RFR said:
Where was the media outrage when we were bombing those countries? Where were the protests when we were bombing those countries?
Click to expand...

dude...are you serious? lol

THREATS AND RESPONSES: NEWS ANALYSIS; A New Power In the Streets - The New York Times

Hundreds March in Mag Mile Anti-War Protest | NBC Chicago

https://popularresistance.org/as-us-attacks-libya-again-peace-group-tells-obama-stop-the-bombing/

Protests, rallies on U.S. military action in Syria

You hear more about Trump's actions because it so morally wrong and appalling. Not too hard to justify military action after Dafur, but almost impossible to justify banning, arbitrarily, some Muslim-majority nations and leaving out the largest backers of terrorism globally.
 
Dude! Are you serious? Lol. I was at some of those anti war protests in LA. They were pathetic.

Never before in all my years have i seen a president get so attacked by the media, by protesters, instantly! The man didn't even start his first day at work.

This is a highly funded, highly organized conspiracy. Yeah, I said it, conspiracy!
There are very powerful organized forces who's agendas will be disturbed, thwarted, or possibly even stopped by Trump.
They will stop at nothing to try to defeat him and it isn't based on reasons of 'morality '.

You believe what you want, thats your right.

But he's the president. He was lawfully elected. Get over it and deal with it. If we let him do his job, we may all benefit.

At least unlike Hillary and Obama, he has already calmed tensions with Russia, and quite possibly has averted WWIII.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top