So, what happens if other countries start banning christians, hindus, Buddhists, etc. Or, if they start banning Americans, or Germans, or Italians?

by **DWags** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 16:35

do we win?

by **NigelUno** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 17:17

Four Georgians detained at Atlanta airport after flying back from Iran

by **tGreenWay** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 17:38

There will probably be repercussions globally. Trump is an asshole playing to the racist dumbfucks who got him elected.

by **GRR Spartan** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 17:51

We are in for a four year stretch of madness and notable exceptions.

Trump won't slam the door on a family member of a naturalized US citizen who is still in Syria or Iran if that person is a valued officer of a company.

Trump's administration has frozen funds for clean ups. Monies for Flint are in limbo. They are wiping whole sections from EPA website. They have stopped reserach programs in the EPA, CDC and USDA. All reportedly for fiscal reasons

Yet the same adminstration wants monies for more voter fraud investigations.

Trump is perfectly happy to run a 4 year re-election campaign of divide and conquer politics.

by **I.B. Fine** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 18:05

GRR Spartan wrote:
Trump is perfectly happy to run a 4 year re-election campaign of divide and conquer politics.

Meet the new president, same as the old one.

by **DWags** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 18:05

I'm curious. I'm looking at this:

Hijackers by Nationality:

Egypt

Mohamed Atta
Lebanon
Ziad Jarrah

Saudi Arabia

Ahmed al Ghamdi
Hamza al Ghamdi
Saeed al Ghamdi
Hani Hanjour
Nawaf al Hazmi
Salem al Hazmi
Ahmad al Haznawi
Ahmed al Nami
Khalid al Mihdhar
Majed Moqed
Abdul Aziz al Omari
Mohand al Shehri
Wail al Shehri
Waleed al Shehri
Satam al Suqami

United Arab Emirates

Fayez Banihammad
Marwan al Shehhi

Why aren't these countries on the list? WTF? Are we really this fucking stupid? I'd at least like an answer as to why these countries, who spawned the most devasting attack on our country since 1941, seven December, aren't at least maybe thought of as possible problems.

by **Floyd Robertson** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 18:08

Meanwhile, Trudeau is owning Trump.

Justin Trudeau ‏@JustinTrudeau 3h3 hours ago
#WelcomeToCanada
So, what happens if other countries start banning christians, hindus, Buddhists, etc. Or, if they start banning Americans, or Germans, or Italians? C3SO9YHXAAMIwvR

So, what happens if other countries start banning christians, hindus, Buddhists, etc. Or, if they start banning Americans, or Germans, or Italians? C3SO9YHXAAMIwvR

Justin Trudeau ‏@JustinTrudeau 3h3 hours ago
To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada
7,627 replies 126,525 retweets 191,596 likes

by **tGreenWay** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 18:37

Floyd Robertson wrote:Meanwhile, Trudeau is owning Trump.

Justin Trudeau ‏@JustinTrudeau 3h3 hours ago
#WelcomeToCanada

Justin Trudeau ‏@JustinTrudeau 3h3 hours ago
To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada
7,627 replies 126,525 retweets 191,596 likes

So, what happens if other countries start banning christians, hindus, Buddhists, etc. Or, if they start banning Americans, or Germans, or Italians? 1486952199

We used to be like that.

by **GRR Spartan** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 20:14

I.B. Fine wrote:
GRR Spartan wrote:
Trump is perfectly happy to run a 4 year re-election campaign of divide and conquer politics.
Meet the new president, same as the old one.

Reading too much alt right again.

Bury your head up Breitbarts ass and be araid again. Start making sure your guns to protect you from the Clinton's and Obama are reading to use against the hoards of nonwhite/non Christian.

What did Obama or Bush2 or Clinton or Bush1 or Reagan do in their first week even close to what Trump has done?

by **Other Teams Pursuing That** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 20:21

So Canada takes atheists? Hmmm...

by **GRR Spartan** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 20:28

Canada is becoming the place American kids will want to move to to have a better chance of living as well or better than their parents.

by Guest Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:00

GRR Spartan wrote:Canada is becoming the place American kids will want to move to to have a better chance of living as well or better than their parents.

I've noticed the lines at the tunnel since the election.

by **Blanch32** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:00

GRR Spartan wrote:Canada is becoming the place American kids will want to move to to have a better chance of living as well or better than their parents.

Isn't that where all the celebs moved to? oh wait....

by **Other Teams Pursuing That** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:03

If you don't like it then git out!!!

by Guest Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:06

Refugee Madness: Trump Is Wrong, But His Liberal Critics Are Crazy

I'm sure most here know more than the author of this piece, but if not it's an interesting read.

The anger at his new policy is seriously misplaced.

President Trump has ordered a temporary, 120-day halt to admitting refugees from seven countries, all of them war-torn states with majority-Muslim populations: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, and Somalia. He has further indicated that, once additional screening provisions are put in place, he wants further refugee admissions from those countries to give priority to Christian refugees over Muslim refugees. Trump’s order is, in characteristic Trump fashion, both ham-handed and underinclusive, and particularly unfair to allies who risked life and limb to help the American war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. But it is also not the dangerous and radical departure from U.S. policy that his liberal critics make it out to be. His policy may be terrible public relations for the United States, but it is fairly narrow and well within the recent tradition of immigration actions taken by the Obama administration.

First, let’s put in context what Trump is actually doing. The executive order, on its face, does not discriminate between Muslim and Christian (or Jewish) immigrants, and it is far from being a complete ban on Muslim immigrants or even Muslim refugees. Trump’s own stated reason for giving preference to Christian refugees is also worth quoting:

Trump was asked whether he would prioritize persecuted Christians in the Middle East for admission as refugees, and he replied, “Yes.”

“They’ve been horribly treated,” he said. “Do you know if you were a Christian in Syria it was impossible, at least very tough, to get into the United States? If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian it was almost impossible. And the reason that was so unfair — everybody was persecuted, in all fairness — but they were chopping off the heads of everybody, but more so the Christians. And I thought it was very, very unfair.

“So we are going to help them.”

Trump isn’t making this up; Obama-administration policy effectively discriminated against persecuted religious-minority Christians from Syria (even while explicitly admitting that ISIS was pursuing a policy of genocide against Syrian Christians), and the response from most of Trump’s liberal critics has been silence:

The United States has accepted 10,801 Syrian refugees, of whom 56 are Christian. Not 56 percent; 56 total, out of 10,801. That is to say, one-half of 1 percent.

The BBC says that 10 percent of all Syrians are Christian, which would mean 2.2 million Christians. . . . Experts say [one] reason for the lack of Christians in the makeup of the refugees is the makeup of the camps.

Christians in the main United Nations refugee camp in Jordan are subject to persecution, they say, and so flee the camps, meaning they are not included in the refugees referred to the U.S. by the U.N.

by **DWags** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:08

Show me that fetus again

So, what happens if other countries start banning christians, hindus, Buddhists, etc. Or, if they start banning Americans, or Germans, or Italians? 27yu1bm

So, what happens if other countries start banning christians, hindus, Buddhists, etc. Or, if they start banning Americans, or Germans, or Italians? 27yu1bm

by **Watch Out Pylon!** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:14

LooseGoose wrote:Refugee Madness: Trump Is Wrong, But His Liberal Critics Are Crazy

I'm sure most here know more than the author of this piece, but if not it's an interesting read.

The anger at his new policy is seriously misplaced.

President Trump has ordered a temporary, 120-day halt to admitting refugees from seven countries, all of them war-torn states with majority-Muslim populations: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, and Somalia. He has further indicated that, once additional screening provisions are put in place, he wants further refugee admissions from those countries to give priority to Christian refugees over Muslim refugees. Trump’s order is, in characteristic Trump fashion, both ham-handed and underinclusive, and particularly unfair to allies who risked life and limb to help the American war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. But it is also not the dangerous and radical departure from U.S. policy that his liberal critics make it out to be. His policy may be terrible public relations for the United States, but it is fairly narrow and well within the recent tradition of immigration actions taken by the Obama administration.

First, let’s put in context what Trump is actually doing. The executive order, on its face, does not discriminate between Muslim and Christian (or Jewish) immigrants, and it is far from being a complete ban on Muslim immigrants or even Muslim refugees. Trump’s own stated reason for giving preference to Christian refugees is also worth quoting:

Trump was asked whether he would prioritize persecuted Christians in the Middle East for admission as refugees, and he replied, “Yes.”

“They’ve been horribly treated,” he said. “Do you know if you were a Christian in Syria it was impossible, at least very tough, to get into the United States? If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian it was almost impossible. And the reason that was so unfair — everybody was persecuted, in all fairness — but they were chopping off the heads of everybody, but more so the Christians. And I thought it was very, very unfair.

“So we are going to help them.”

Trump isn’t making this up; Obama-administration policy effectively discriminated against persecuted religious-minority Christians from Syria (even while explicitly admitting that ISIS was pursuing a policy of genocide against Syrian Christians), and the response from most of Trump’s liberal critics has been silence:

The United States has accepted 10,801 Syrian refugees, of whom 56 are Christian. Not 56 percent; 56 total, out of 10,801. That is to say, one-half of 1 percent.

The BBC says that 10 percent of all Syrians are Christian, which would mean 2.2 million Christians. . . . Experts say [one] reason for the lack of Christians in the makeup of the refugees is the makeup of the camps.

Christians in the main United Nations refugee camp in Jordan are subject to persecution, they say, and so flee the camps, meaning they are not included in the refugees referred to the U.S. by the U.N.

Sorry, I don't put much stock in fake news.

by **DWags** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:24

by **NigelUno** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:31

Floyd Robertson wrote:Meanwhile, Trudeau is owning Trump.

Justin Trudeau ‏@JustinTrudeau 3h3 hours ago
#WelcomeToCanada

Justin Trudeau ‏@JustinTrudeau 3h3 hours ago
To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada
7,627 replies 126,525 retweets 191,596 likes

Sounds like we'll need to build another wall on the north side.

by Guest Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:43

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Refugee Madness: Trump Is Wrong, But His Liberal Critics Are Crazy

I'm sure most here know more than the author of this piece, but if not it's an interesting read.

Sorry, I don't put much stock in fake news.

Nor have much of an open mind to learn at this point. Who selected the countries on the list? When was it done?

OBAMA’S ADMINISTRATION MADE THE “MUSLIM BAN” POSSIBLE AND THE MEDIA WON’T TELL YOU

I was outraged by the ban on refugees from war-torn countries in the Middle East. I’ve covered refugees fleeing war in Iraq and Syria over the last two years, meeting families on the road in Greece, Serbia and Macedonia, speaking to poor people in Turkey and Jordan and discussing the hopes and fears of people displaced in Iraq. If you want to ban “terrorists,” these are the last people to hit with a refugee ban. Instead the government should be using the best intelligence possible to find people being radicalized, some of whom have lived in the US their whole lives or who come from countries not affected by the ban, such as Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.

by Guest Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 21:45

Or maybe you don't realize that we'd done something very similar a couple years ago......of course the Press wasn't in freakout mode then.....as they are now - busy whipping their lemmings up.

The Obama Administration Stopped Processing Iraq Refugee Requests For 6 Months In 2011

by **Watch Out Pylon!** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 22:05

Why would I try to learn anything from your fake news sources?

by **InTenSity** Sat 28 Jan 2017 - 23:02

DWags wrote:Show me that fetus again

As harsh as this sounds. They don't give a Fuck because that boy wasn't in the womb. Actual human life means Jack shit to a Republican. Fantasy fetus is worth fighting for.

by **NigelUno** Sun 29 Jan 2017 - 7:41

LooseGoose wrote:Or maybe you don't realize that we'd done something very similar a couple years ago......of course the Press wasn't in freakout mode then.....as they are now - busy whipping their lemmings up.

The Obama Administration Stopped Processing Iraq Refugee Requests For 6 Months In 2011

Congressmen: 11 held at Atlanta airport after Trump’s executive order

"At least five of those detained are lawful permanent residents who had just returned from trips to Iran, several relatives said."

Assuming this isn't fake news (which might be a great leap for you to make), can you comment on it without having a partisan take?

Is it ridiculous that in Trump's zeal to appease his supporters that he signed orders without providing Customs' officials with adequate instructions?

Are you defending Trump in this instance? Or just providing misdirection (for some reason)?

by **DWags** Sun 29 Jan 2017 - 8:03

Honestly, you can't make this shit up. I accidentally turned on Fox News and the lady was saying "but the Obama administration created the list of countries"

So, what happens if other countries start banning christians, hindus, Buddhists, etc. Or, if they start banning Americans, or Germans, or Italians? 502811600

So, what happens if other countries start banning christians, hindus, Buddhists, etc. Or, if they start banning Americans, or Germans, or Italians? 502811600

They're blaming Obama for Trump signing this. TRUMP SIGNED IT. But it's obama's fault. They're acting like Obama just signed this order. And if they're saying shit like that, does that mean perhaps they know it's as un American as you can get. Or that they know the 911 terrorists countries have too many business ties to our country?

Thanks Obama.

by **Floyd Robertson** Sun 29 Jan 2017 - 8:15

NigelUno wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Or maybe you don't realize that we'd done something very similar a couple years ago......of course the Press wasn't in freakout mode then.....as they are now - busy whipping their lemmings up.

The Obama Administration Stopped Processing Iraq Refugee Requests For 6 Months In 2011

Congressmen: 11 held at Atlanta airport after Trump’s executive order

"At least five of those detained are lawful permanent residents who had just returned from trips to Iran, several relatives said."

Assuming this isn't fake news (which might be a great leap for you to make), can you comment on it without having a partisan take?

Is it ridiculous that in Trump's zeal to appease his supporters that he signed orders without providing Customs' officials with adequate instructions?

Are you defending Trump in this instance? Or just providing misdirection (for some reason)?

I read some commentary last night that, lacking specific guidelines in the order itself, no government entity should implement an executive order without consulting their department's legal counsel and obtaining guidance first. That made perfect sense to me. It's clear none of this happened, leading the federal judge temporarily striking down the executive order.

by **GRR Spartan** Sun 29 Jan 2017 - 9:14

Even PM May is breaking with Trump his latest directive and she was over here for a kumbaya tour for her Brexit buddy Trump.

Nothing says America more than not allowing Iraqi's who acted as translators into the US after they were promised their bravery in helping our military and civilian personnel would be rewarded.

by **DWags** Sun 29 Jan 2017 - 17:41

by **Cameron** Sun 29 Jan 2017 - 17:53

DWags wrote:

Why do they have to stop saying that their concerns are religious? If not religious, then what kind of concerns are they?

To me, one of the harms of religion is that it makes some people's priorities a bit silly. "It's a matter of utmost importance to codify into law that life begins at fertilization, but people of other religions coming into my country should be restricted" sounds exactly like a religious concern to me.

by **Robert J Sakimano** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 7:47

DWags wrote:Show me that fetus again

paging Goose.

by **NigelUno** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 9:39

I'm not sure Trump is/was prepared for the backlash.

I'm guessing Congress (and the public) will be discussing whether the President (alone) should have powers to enact executive orders like this one.

It certainly doesn't help that the implementation was a disaster.

by **Robert J Sakimano** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 9:57

NigelUno wrote:I'm not sure Trump is/was prepared for the backlash.

I'm guessing Congress (and the public) will be discussing whether the President (alone) should have powers to enact executive orders like this one.

It certainly doesn't help that the implementation was a disaster.

Trump probably wonders what the big deal is.. kinda like "when I want to sexually assault a woman, I just do it.. I don't ask for permission first"..

by Guest Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 10:32

InTenSity wrote:
DWags wrote:Show me that fetus again

As harsh as this sounds. They don't give a Fuck because that boy wasn't in the womb. Actual human life means Jack shit to a Republican. Fantasy fetus is worth fighting for.

Intensity? That's fucking outrageous. We know your circumstances but you don't know all of ours. For you to say that is well beyond the pale. You ask people here not to be crude by using certain terms then you paint HALF the FUCKING country with that SHIT? You need to think harder on it.

by **Robert J Sakimano** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 10:36

if the last few days have proven anything about the "pro-life" hypocrites, it's what most of us have always known:

a) "pro-life" is dependent on race, religion, socioeconomic status and cultural attachment.

b) there is a big difference in being truly pro-life versus simply "pro-birth".

by Guest Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 10:46

Robert J Sakimano wrote:if the last few days have proven anything about the "pro-life" hypocrites, it's what most of us have always known:
a) "pro-life" is dependent on race, religion, socioeconomic status and cultural attachment.
b) there is a big difference in being truly pro-life versus simply "pro-birth".

Bullshit. Quit trying to compare convicted murderers and rapists to innocent children.

I'm tired the whole "Republicans don't care about children" shit being thrown in here by the proponents of butchering those children in the womb as if that's the moral high ground. That's a fucking joke.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 11:33

LooseGoose wrote:
Robert J Sakimano wrote:if the last few days have proven anything about the "pro-life" hypocrites, it's what most of us have always known:
a) "pro-life" is dependent on race, religion, socioeconomic status and cultural attachment.
b) there is a big difference in being truly pro-life versus simply "pro-birth".

Bullshit. Quit trying to compare convicted murderers and rapists to innocent children.

I'm tired the whole "Republicans don't care about children" shit being thrown in here by the proponents of butchering those children in the womb as if that's the moral high ground. That's a fucking joke.

Goose perpetuating the stereotype of Republicans only caring about humans inside of the womb. Might want to tone down the whole butchering children schtick.

Or not, we do have freedom of speech... until your boy takes that away from us in the name of national security.

by **GRR Spartan** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 11:40

The GOP's evangelical wing has been pro military / pro death sentence and pro life for decades.

A lot of them used to think dancing was sinful but with these political stances tap dancing would seem to be a requirement.

by **GRR Spartan** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 11:52

Interestingly Trump may be telling the truth about the ban not being about religion unless you worship money.

From the link:

"The seven countries whose citizens are subject to the ban are relatively poor. Some, such as Syria, are torn by civil war; others are only now emerging from war. One thing these countries have in common is that they are places where the Trump organization does little to no business.

By contrast, other neighboring Muslim countries are not on the list, even though some of their citizens pose just as great a risk — if not greater — of exporting terrorism to the United States. Among them are Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt. A vast majority of people living in these countries, like the people living in the seven subject to the immigration ban, are peaceful and law abiding. But these three countries have exported terror to the United States in the past. They accounted for 18 of the 19 terrorists who perpetrated the Sept. 11 attack on American soil (an attack which was directed by another Saudi, Osama Bin Laden, with the assistance of an Egyptian, Ayman al-Zawahri).

These countries, unlike those subject to the ban, are ones where Donald Trump has done business. In Saudi Arabia, his most recent government financial disclosure revealed several limited liability Trump corporations. In Egypt, he had two Trump companies registered. In the United Arab Emirates, he had licensed his name to a Dubai golf resort and a luxury residential development and spa. Some of these entities have since been closed, and others remain active."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/opinion/who-hasnt-trump-banned-people-from-places-where-hes-made-money.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region

by **Rocinante** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 11:53

I'm all for banning Italians.

by **Floyd Robertson** Mon 30 Jan 2017 - 11:57

GRR Spartan wrote:Interestingly Trump may be telling the truth about the ban not being about religion unless you worship money.

From the link:

"The seven countries whose citizens are subject to the ban are relatively poor. Some, such as Syria, are torn by civil war; others are only now emerging from war. One thing these countries have in common is that they are places where the Trump organization does little to no business.

By contrast, other neighboring Muslim countries are not on the list, even though some of their citizens pose just as great a risk — if not greater — of exporting terrorism to the United States. Among them are Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt. A vast majority of people living in these countries, like the people living in the seven subject to the immigration ban, are peaceful and law abiding. But these three countries have exported terror to the United States in the past. They accounted for 18 of the 19 terrorists who perpetrated the Sept. 11 attack on American soil (an attack which was directed by another Saudi, Osama Bin Laden, with the assistance of an Egyptian, Ayman al-Zawahri).

These countries, unlike those subject to the ban, are ones where Donald Trump has done business. In Saudi Arabia, his most recent government financial disclosure revealed several limited liability Trump corporations. In Egypt, he had two Trump companies registered. In the United Arab Emirates, he had licensed his name to a Dubai golf resort and a luxury residential development and spa. Some of these entities have since been closed, and others remain active."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/opinion/who-hasnt-trump-banned-people-from-places-where-hes-made-money.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region

I'm sure that Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Kuwait not being on the list has nothing to do with them being among the top five Middle East oil producers either.

by Sponsored content