Baxter Parp Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Deplorable said: The nature of Islam is also the problem. Interesting. Just what is the nature of the 1.9 billion people who follow Islam? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 Now they're making up atrocities to justify their racism. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 Islamic terrorism is a huge threat to many countries around the world, only an idiot would deny this. Islamic terrorism is linked to Islam, again another undeniable fact. The issue is how do we minimise the threat of such terrorism. Trump's actions aren't doing that, they're not designed to do that, they're not even motivated by terrorist threats. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorlomin Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 35 minutes ago, Deplorable said: Oh, I agree that US foreign policy is a part of the problem. The nature of Islam is also the problem. The US has done a bunch of unsavory things in Latin America and we've made a bunch of enemies there, but Hispanic immigrants are not engaged in political violence against ordinary Americans in response. I'm sure people in India might bear a few grudges against your country, but I haven't heard about them using those historical grudges to kill ordinary British citizens. But others have. And just because some in a religion use religion to justify violence that means all member of the religion are violent? And just how many Muslims is "mass immigration" that you are determined to stop? Why is no one stopping people from the actual known sources of global Jihadism such as Egypt, home of Qutb and Saudi home of near enough every other headbanger on the go? And finally an American complaining about mass migration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 (edited) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38853390 The US House of Representatives has voted to scrap regulations that require background checks for people purchasing guns with mental health issues. The checks, introduced under the Obama administration, are believed to affect an estimated 75,000 people. You have to love the people that run the USA. ETA - terrible grammer from the BBC. Edited February 3, 2017 by Granny Danger 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The OP Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 (edited) The thing that really distresses me about the USA is the tendency to use the word 'folks' in government statements about serious subjects. Edited February 3, 2017 by The OP 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hehawhehaw Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 19 hours ago, Sonsteam of 08 said: Apologies if it's been posted, but everyone needs to see this. I don't know what's the worst bit. The fact he doesn't hide his attitude, the fact the journo is forced out, the fact none of the other journos put up any sort of fight for him, the fact the bodyguard tells him to "go back to his own country" or the fact that Trump represents a lot of American people. I'm absolutely not the type to get all high and mighty over things. A few thousand people protesting in Glasgow is utterly pointless, but I hope the Democrats are are feeling mighty proud that they put up their worst possible candidate because they didn't take Trump seriously. I thought he'd maybe calm down a bit, but the world could end up completely humped with him (and his stupid wee claw hands) in charge of the US. The only positive is that he's overweight and in his 70s...so, you know...Statistically he can't have long left, especially in such a stressful position. What was the question he was trying to ask? All I heard was him trying to tell the President of the USA what to do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 6 minutes ago, The OP said: The thing that really distresses me about the USA is the tendency to use the word 'folks' in government statements about serious subjects. Yeah you're right. That's the absolute worst thing. Everything else pales into insignificance... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerberus Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 This vote is supported by the ACLU. They say that people with a disability should not be discriminated against and denied their right or privilege. Are they right? I wonder if the mixed up liberals who donated to the ACLU off the back of the Muslim ban want their money back. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 24 minutes ago, Cerberus said: This vote is supported by the ACLU. They say that people with a disability should not be discriminated against and denied their right or privilege. Are they right? I wonder if the mixed up liberals who donated to the ACLU off the back of the Muslim ban want their money back. It's a broad sweep. It would include someone who's too mentally incapacitated to look after his own money but can hunt safely. It also includes full blown psychotic schizophrenics with voices in their head telling them to kill. I'm not sure if they intend to replace the law with something more targeted. By the sounds of it they don't. Anyone can just go to a gun fair and buy an assault rifle with no checks anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 5 hours ago, Granny Danger said: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38853390 The US House of Representatives has voted to scrap regulations that require background checks for people purchasing guns with mental health issues. The checks, introduced under the Obama administration, are believed to affect an estimated 75,000 people. You have to love the people that run the USA. ETA - terrible grammer from the BBC. How's their spelling? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 24 minutes ago, welshbairn said: It's a broad sweep. It would include someone who's too mentally incapacitated to look after his own money but can hunt safely. It also includes full blown psychotic schizophrenics with voices in their head telling them to kill. I'm not sure if they intend to replace the law with something more targeted. By the sounds of it they don't. Anyone can just go to a gun fair and buy an assault rifle with no checks anyway. You've become a facilitator of trolls. It's almost as bad as being a troll, possibly worse. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 Trump is right that we face huge threats from people who hate us and our values. The leading story on the BBC news just now was about a terrorist on trial for stockpiling ammunition and mines to use against British targets. He's a white catholic rather than Muslim though. #BantheIrish 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 8 minutes ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said: Trump is right that we face huge threats from people who hate us and our values. The leading story on the BBC news just now was about a terrorist on trial for stockpiling ammunition and mines to use against British targets. He's a white catholic rather than Muslim though. #BantheIrish More terrorism inspired by religion though. #Banreligion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: You've become a facilitator of trolls. It's almost as bad as being a troll, possibly worse. Do you ever read all the way through posts before commentating? That was about the length of a tweet, and trying to explain the extraordinary thing of the ACLU and the NRA being on the same side over gun control. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 8 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Do you ever read all the way through posts before commentating? That was about the length of a tweet, and trying to explain the extraordinary thing of the ACLU and the NRA being on the same side over gun control. I do. You are not answerable to me nor do you have to explain yourself to me if you don't want to, but I have a question. Why the fuck do you insist in responding to the sort of post that Cerebus made? His post showed him to be an utter moron. Only a complete fucking lunatic or an out-and-out troll would try to defend the decision by Congress on this issue. You responded to his post like it merited a considered response it doesn't. Him, swampy and the other trump 'supporter' on here really do not deserve to be taken seriously or encouraged. You're post was absolutely spot on but it was in response to a level of stupidity that is best ignored IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 (edited) So when the White House claimed that only 109 people had been inconvenienced by the ban, they were being slightly misleading: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/over-100000-visas-revoked-government-lawyer-says-in-virginia-court/index.html?Sr=twtsr0203visas So it's actually 100,000 affected rather than 109. Still, what's 3 orders of magnitude between friends? Also, it's incredible how they will lie about literally everything, whether or not it's something people even give a sh*t about: Promoting the first ever woman to that role, good stuff. Except that, in literally the second sentence of the article he himself linked in to in the tweet: Quote Haspel is the second woman to ever hold the position. They are clearly utterly incapable of being honest about anything. Edited February 3, 2017 by Carl Cort's Hamstring 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 27 minutes ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said: So when the White House claimed that only 109 people had been inconvenienced by the ban, they were being slightly misleading: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/over-100000-visas-revoked-government-lawyer-says-in-virginia-court/index.html?Sr=twtsr0203visas So it's actually 100,000 affected rather than 109. Still, what's 3 orders of magnitude between friends? Also, it's incredible how they will lie about literally everything, whether or not it's something people even give a sh*t about: Promoting the first ever woman to that role, good stuff. Except that, in literally the second sentence of the article he himself linked in to in the tweet: They are clearly utterly incapable of being honest about anything. I read one suggestion that the continual lying is a deliberate tactic. Tires out the opposition by constantly making them fact check EVERYTHING and inures folk to the process. I would hope that this is wrong and that instead it builds the anger and opposition and ruins credibility. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 35 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: I do. You are not answerable to me nor do you have to explain yourself to me if you don't want to, but I have a question. Why the fuck do you insist in responding to the sort of post that Cerebus made? His post showed him to be an utter moron. Only a complete fucking lunatic or an out-and-out troll would try to defend the decision by Congress on this issue. You responded to his post like it merited a considered response it doesn't. Him, swampy and the other trump 'supporter' on here really do not deserve to be taken seriously or encouraged. You're post was absolutely spot on but it was in response to a level of stupidity that is best ignored IMO. Do you think their shite should be left unchallenged for young lurkers to read? Answering with hysterical rage does no good either. You have to argue on the facts or you lose the argument. The alt right are winning at the moment by inventing "alternative facts". That's why they have to be challenged and not ignored. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Do you think their shite should be left unchallenged for young lurkers to read? Answering with hysterical rage does no good either. You have to argue on the facts or you lose the argument. The alt right are winning at the moment by inventing "alternative facts". That's why they have to be challenged and not ignored. Yeah, I don't think you can have a rational debate with idiots. If we ignore them they will eventually disappear and none of us will have to read their shite. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.