PDA

View Full Version : Election 2016



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4 5

Bos Mutus
12-10-2015, 05:43 PM
Right...and the background check is to ensure they are legally allowed to have the weapon. Both of these fall under the SAME reason, which is to keep people safe (whether it works or not is another discussion).

So, please, stop with the semantics game. The background check and the waiting period serve different purposes but are for the same reason. I hate when you play these little games where you pretend you don't comprehend based on one or two words.

I'm really not playing a semantics game...

Sure, both to keep us safe..that's pretty broad.

You said earlier that the waiting period was for the purpose of completing the background check...that isn't my understanding of the purpose of the waiting period. That's what I was addressing.

That hey, they are both gun policies...sure, then they are of the same broad purpose.

sandsjames
12-10-2015, 05:48 PM
I'm really not playing a semantics game...

Sure, both to keep us safe..that's pretty broad.

You said earlier that the waiting period was for the purpose of completing the background check...that isn't my understanding of the purpose of the waiting period. That's what I was addressing.

That hey, they are both gun policies...sure, then they are of the same broad purpose.

Having working brakes on my car and wearing a seatbelt serve two different purposes. One makes sure I can stop, the other makes sure I don't go flying out of the car in case of an accident. One is to prevent an accident, the other is to protect me during an accident. Both are important for the same FUCKING reason.

Bos Mutus
12-10-2015, 05:49 PM
He's an intelligent guy. He knows that the majority of the people he's pandering to don't know the difference between an Arab or a Muslim and that the word Muslim carries much more weight. He knows that the people he's pandering to don't think of Ali, Abdul Jabar, etc as Muslim. What his crowd think of when they here "Muslim" is everyone from an Arab country, whether Muslim or not.

I can sort of buy that...though I kinda think he thinks just like the people he's pandering too.


I think his ego has him serious about becoming President because he wants to prove that he is better than everyone else. The job of President isn't important to him. Winning the Presidency is. He's a reality show character who will do anything, no matter how outlandish, to stay in the Big Brother house. But, ultimately, I don't think he wants to be the President for the purpose the office is intended for, no.

OK

Then why are you such a supporter of his ?

[/yes, that was a joke]

Bos Mutus
12-10-2015, 05:59 PM
Having working brakes on my car and wearing a seatbelt serve two different purposes. One makes sure I can stop, the other makes sure I don't go flying out of the car in case of an accident. One is to prevent an accident, the other is to protect me during an accident. Both are important for the same FUCKING reason.

Yes.

But, if I said we need to wear seatbelts so the car can stop safely...you would question that and it wouldn't be playing a semantics. Your first comment was that the waiting period was there in order to give time to complete the background investigation...that was what I questioned...I'm not even sure I was correct, it's just not how I understand it...[/quote]

What I'm saying is, I don't see that a waiting period keeps us safer...I don't really see it as preventing any shootings.I

Background checks...I can understand.

f that is the reason for the waiting period is simply to complete background checks, then fine...what I'm saying is that is not my understanding of the purpose of waiting period, and if that is not the purpose, then I don't see how they keep anyone safe.

I didn't question whether or not they were both there for the broad purpose of enhancing gun safety...I never questioned that...I do question how a waiting period accomplishes that purpose.

Doesn't really matter...silly tangent. Whatever, yes, both rules serve the same purpose.

MikeKerriii
12-10-2015, 06:18 PM
We all know he meant Middle Easterners/Arabs, even though he said Muslims...not that it makes it better or worse, but that's what he was referring to...not Muslims specifically.
. No it is just convenient for you to assume he meant Middle easterners and Arabs.

MikeKerriii
12-10-2015, 06:21 PM
He's an intelligent guy. He knows that the majority of the people he's pandering to don't know the difference between an Arab or a Muslim and that the word Muslim carries much more weight. He knows that the people he's pandering to don't think of Ali, Abdul Jabar, etc as Muslim. What his crowd think of when they here "Muslim" is everyone from an Arab country, whether Muslim or not.

He is intelligent, but is does he have enough sanity left to be able to tell the difference? Why pander to bigoted idiots?

Rusty Jones
12-10-2015, 06:32 PM
I would probably agree that when Trump says "All Muslims"...he is picturing all Muslims as being Middle Eastern Arabs...probably not realizing that only about 20% of Muslims are such.

Bear in mind, however, that outside of that 20% that are Arab; the most significant non-Arab Muslims are the Turkic ethnic groups, Iranians, and Pakistanis. In other words, groups that are still in the Middle East and northern Africa and are physically indistinguishable from Arabs (at least to the majority of Americans). If we lumped them all together, they make up a majority... with minorities, of course, in eastern Europe (former Yugoslavian countries), upper sub-Saharan Africa, and Indonesia.

Bos Mutus
12-10-2015, 06:38 PM
Bear in mind, however, that outside of that 20% that are Arab; the most significant non-Arab Muslims are the Turkic ethnic groups, Iranians, and Pakistanis. In other words, groups that are still in the Middle East and northern Africa and are physically indistinguishable from Arabs (at least to the majority of Americans). If we lumped them all together, they make up a majority...

My understanding is that they are all included in the 20%...other Muslims come from Indonesia, Malaysia India, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc.


with minorities, of course, in eastern Europe (former Yugoslavian countries), upper sub-Saharan Africa, and Indonesia.

yeah...I don't know. I'm not a student of Islam by any stretch and don't know a whole about it. I do know that Muhammed Ali and Kareem Abdul Jabbar are Muslims, but probably not who Trump really wants to talk about even though he says "All Muslims"

Rainmaker
12-10-2015, 06:49 PM
He Why pander to bigoted idiots?


Good Question. This type of scenario is happening regularly.

http://nypost.com/2015/12/09/students-demand-college-renames-lynch-building-because-of-racial-overtones/




Protesters at a Pennsylvania college are demanding that the school rename a building called Lynch Memorial Hall because of the racial overtones of the word “lynch.”

The group of students at Lebanon Valley College submitted a list of demands to the administrators, including nixing the name of the building devoted to the college’s former president, Clyde A. Lynch.

“All of the hate at this school makes me want to cry,” one student, Lacey Eriksen, wrote on Twitter about the protest.

Student organizers said the college needed to address “institutional injustices” on the campus.

“It’s a rare moment here at Lebanon Valley College,” Michael Schroeder, an associate professor of history, told PennLive outside a recent demonstration.

The demonstration Schroeder spoke at was closed to photos and video by organizers who sought to create a “safe space,” the site said.

A school spokesman called former president Lynch a “very important figure” in the history of the college. He is credited with guiding the school through the Great Depression.

Other demands by the group include a more diverse curriculum, more sensitivity training for staff and regular surveys of the racial climate on campus

Rainmaker
12-10-2015, 07:06 PM
Blacks make up a grand total of 32 of 1600 of the student population of Lebanon Valley College, PA

which also has an undergraduate tuition of $24,770.00 a year.

So, to sum up, These are mostly spoiled brat, white kids that are cuckolding themselves while crying about "micro-aggressions" and serving as the useful idiots for the professional victim class deadbeat agenda.

Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.

Trump 2016.

sandsjames
12-10-2015, 07:10 PM
Blacks make up a grand total of 32 of 1600 of the student population of Lebanon Valley College,
which has an undergraduate tuition of $24,770.00 a year.

So, to sum up, These are mostly spoiled brat rich, pussy, white kids that are cuckolding themselves while crying about "micro-aggressions" and serving as the useful idiots for the professional victim class deadbeat agenda.

Trump 2016.

I think it's more offensive that it's called "Lebanon" Valley College.

Rainmaker
12-10-2015, 07:17 PM
I think it's more offensive that it's called "Lebanon" Valley College.

I wouldn't expect you to understand because of your white upbringing.

Rusty Jones
12-10-2015, 08:40 PM
Sure...there is a perception that someone who doesn't agree with homosexual marriage is homophobic. There is a perception that someone who doesn't agree with abortion is against women's rights. There is a perception that someone who thinks a cop was justified in shooting a black person is racist. There is a perception that someone who wants to ensure people coming into this country are going to be good citizens is racist. The perception is that anyone who disagrees with something that affects a "protected" group is hateful.

Here's an article that's a very good example of what I'm talking about:

https://www.rawstory.com/2015/12/missouri-man-says-hanging-noose-with-confederate-flag-is-a-rope-tying-lesson-and-not-racism-at-all/

MikeKerriii
12-10-2015, 09:25 PM
Bear in mind, however, that outside of that 20% that are Arab; the most significant non-Arab Muslims are the Turkic ethnic groups, Iranians, and Pakistanis. In other words, groups that are still in the Middle East and northern Africa and are physically indistinguishable from Arabs (at least to the majority of Americans). If we lumped them all together, they make up a majority... with minorities, of course, in eastern Europe (former Yugoslavian countries), upper sub-Saharan Africa, and Indonesia.Indonesia is the Nation with the highest Muslim population with about 202 Million Muslims. Bangladesh as about 150 million, India has 177 Million, None of those nations people look much like Arabs. That is a third of Islam . About a FIFTH, of Muslims are from the Middle East.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

Rusty Jones
12-10-2015, 09:37 PM
Indonesia is the Nation with the highest Muslim population with about 202 Million Muslims. Bangladesh as about 150 million, India has 177 Million, None of those nations people look much like Arabs. That is a third of Islam . About a FIFTH, of Muslims are from the Middle East.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

None of the Turkic countries are considered to be "Middle East." Turkey is considered to be Europe, and all of the "stans" that were former Soviet Republics are considered to be Central Asia.

Furthermore, you said that people from India and Bangladesh don't look much like Arabs. I agree. However, the key phrase I mentioned is "to most Americans." I mentioned a few posts ago how many people who aren't even Muslim are getting harassed and attacked because they're mistaken for Muslims - Sikhs probably being the most common victim of this, but Indians in general are being mistaken for Arabs here in the US.

Bos Mutus
12-10-2015, 10:08 PM
None of the Turkic countries are considered to be "Middle East." Turkey is considered to be Europe, and all of the "stans" that were former Soviet Republics are considered to be Central Asia.

Furthermore, you said that people from India and Bangladesh don't look much like Arabs. I agree. However, the key phrase I mentioned is "to most Americans." I mentioned a few posts ago how many people who aren't even Muslim are getting harassed and attacked because they're mistaken for Muslims - Sikhs probably being the most common victim of this, but Indians in general are being mistaken for Arabs here in the US.

Here is an interesting document...and is probably the source for many of the statistics were lobbing about.:

http://www.pewforum.org/files/2009/10/Muslimpopulation.pdf

Though it looks like they count Turkey as Asia, not Europe...though they do count North Africa as part of the Middle East 20%

Rusty Jones
12-10-2015, 10:13 PM
Here is an interesting document...and is probably the source for many of the statistics were lobbing about.:

http://www.pewforum.org/files/2009/10/Muslimpopulation.pdf

Though it looks like they count Turkey as Asia, not Europe...though they do count North Africa as part of the Middle East 20%

I figured that North Africa would be included, since they're considered to be Arabs.

Bos Mutus
12-10-2015, 10:23 PM
I can't recall him getting married again after Ivanka.

Ivanka is his daughter...:rolleyes:

MikeKerriii
12-10-2015, 10:26 PM
I figured that North Africa would be included, since they're considered to be Arabs.

Don't say that loudly in Algeria, the result is likeluy to involve blood, hospitals or even coffins, If you say that to a rural Tuareg those things might be preferable to the result. Berbewrs Don't like to be called Arabs, Tuareg even less so, the Foreign Legionaries kept one bullet separate in case of Tuareg capture. All, in all, they are pretty nice people just not to be trifled with or insulted.

Rainmaker
12-10-2015, 10:33 PM
Ivanka is his daughter...:rolleyes:

It's going to be so nice to have an attractive FLOTUS after 8 yrs of looking at that Wookie Manchelle

Rusty Jones
12-10-2015, 10:35 PM
Don't say that loudly in Algeria, the result is likeluy to involve blood, hospitals or even coffins, If you say that to a rural Tuareg those things might be preferable to the result. Berbewrs Don't like to be called Arabs, Tuareg even less so, the Foreign Legionaries kept one bullet separate in case of Tuareg capture. All, in all, they are pretty nice people just not to be trifled with or insulted.

99% of Algeria is mixed with Arab and Berber (and they identify with both), and Arabic is the official language of Algeria.

Tuaregs mainly live in Niger and Mali.

sandsjames
12-10-2015, 10:44 PM
You guys are talking geography and biology. However, that's irrelevant to the point of this thread. If you gave everyone in the U.S. pictures of people from different countries/regions and asked them to point out a Muslim, the majority would point at the picture of someone from Iraq/Iran/Saudi/Turkey/etc.

MikeKerriii
12-10-2015, 11:24 PM
You guys are talking geography and biology. However, that's irrelevant to the point of this thread. If you gave everyone in the U.S. pictures of people from different countries/regions and asked them to point out a Muslim, the majority would point at the picture of someone from Iraq/Iran/Saudi/Turkey/etc. So is the fact that many Americans are ignorant as hell about the world either breaking news or somehow relevant in some way to the subject at hand?

If Trump is idiotic and ignorant enough to make the same conclusions He is a dim-wit not the genius he pretend to be, especially after decades of travel. If he is playing the fool to please fools he is just scum.

Rainmaker
12-10-2015, 11:53 PM
So is the fact that many Americans are ignorant as hell about the world either breaking news or somehow relevant in some way to the subject at hand?

If Trump is idiotic and ignorant enough to make the same conclusions He is a dim-wit not the genius he pretend to be, especially after decades of travel. If he is playing the fool to please fools he is just scum.

It's going to be a rough 8 years for you under our next Moderate Nationalist President Trump.

I'm worried that you're going to have a nervous breakdown when it happens.

Recommend you start planning your return to Canada Mike.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 12:15 AM
So is the fact that many Americans are ignorant as hell about the world either breaking news or somehow relevant in some way to the subject at hand?

If Trump is idiotic and ignorant enough to make the same conclusions He is a dim-wit not the genius he pretend to be, especially after decades of travel. If he is playing the fool to please fools he is just scum.

What's funny is you don't even see that he's playing people like you. He wants the exact reaction you are giving him. He feeds off of it. So keep playing his game.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 12:17 AM
What's funny is you don't even see that he's playing people like you. He wants the exact reaction you are giving him. He feeds off of it. So keep playing his game.

Eh, I think it's really his supporters do. He doesn't win the election because of the people he pisses off. He wins it by the people who are happy that he's pissing them off.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 12:19 AM
What's funny is you don't even see that he's playing people like you. He wants the exact reaction you are giving him. He feeds off of it. So keep playing his game.

Then again, maybe you're right. There's no way in HELL that Trump actually believes this:

http://www.theroot.com/articles/news/2015/12/trump_i_m_going_to_win_the_african_american_vote.h tml

He has to be saying it to get the reaction.

TJMAC77SP
12-11-2015, 12:24 AM
Jesus !!!!!!!! Google got a massive work out in this thread.

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 12:25 AM
What's funny is you don't even see that he's playing people like you. He wants the exact reaction you are giving him. He feeds off of it. So keep playing his game.

No, he wants your reaction, fascists function best when they seem to be harmless and of real threat. I believe that he means what he says

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 12:29 AM
Then again, maybe you're right. There's no way in HELL that Trump actually believes this:

http://www.theroot.com/articles/news/2015/12/trump_i_m_going_to_win_the_african_american_vote.h tml

He has to be saying it to get the reaction.

You are s assuming that he is rational, I think that is a doubtful assumption,

The big lie, is a old fashioned technique, repeat a lie often enough and your supporters will believe it. Just like the idiots who were "Birthers".

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 02:01 AM
Trump has gotten Anonymous's attention:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/optrump-anonymous-declares-war-donald-trump-ddos-attack-following-muslim-ban-speech-1532739

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 03:28 AM
Trump has gotten Anonymous's attention:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/optrump-anonymous-declares-war-donald-trump-ddos-attack-following-muslim-ban-speech-1532739

Further confirming my suspicion that "anonymous" is a BS state operation. The current establishment hates Trump (because he can not be bought off, like the other candidate money whores) and must stop him.

garhkal
12-11-2015, 03:52 AM
61% of mass shootings since 1982 were committed by whites.

http://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-shooter-s-race/

Where is the call to ban whites? Or maybe give THEM a little extra scrutiny before getting a gun?

Let's compare the day to day gang shooting # of deaths with the Mass shootings then. This year alone, we have had what, 15 mass shootings claiming what, 400 total lives between them?
Compare that to Chicago on it's own which had 216 for the first HALF a year. 99% of those are black on black crimes.. So why not do the same with blacks?


63% of the population is currently white (in 1980 it was 80%), so that sounds about right. Just curious in these statistics. What race do you think people of Middle Eastern or North African (MENA) descent are counted?

They can't be counting them as "other" because, I can think of San Bernadino, Chattanooga and Ft. Hood just off the top of my head.

So, there's only been 72 mass shootings in 33 years? I'm surprised to hear that. That doesn't sound like a lot in a Nation of 200+ Million firearms in private hands.

Last i checked, Muslims count as "white". Just like a lot of surveys i see do the same with Latinos.


Yeah, because for far too many, it's going to take a white hooded robe and a burning cross to see that he's racist. And even then....


Since whites, blacks, asians, latinos etc can all be Muslims, how is wanting to not let muslims in Racist??


Sure...there is a perception that someone who doesn't agree with homosexual marriage is homophobic. There is a perception that someone who doesn't agree with abortion is against women's rights. There is a perception that someone who thinks a cop was justified in shooting a black person is racist. There is a perception that someone who wants to ensure people coming into this country are going to be good citizens is racist. The perception is that anyone who disagrees with something that affects a "protected" group is hateful.

Too true SJ. Just like there is a perception (well media bias) that someone against ILLEGAL immigration just wants all mexicans to go home. Or is against ALL immigrants.


2 of the last three terrorist attacks in the US have been by so called "Christians" Should we ban Christians from entering?

Which 2 were those?? Are you seriously labeling the Charleston shooting a 'terror attack'?
Or the one last week in Colorado as terrorism??


In this case the hatred is open and loud, it takes willful blindness and deafness not to recognize it.

Such as your overt hatred of trump, anything he says and anyone who supports him.


Muslim behavior/terrorism correlated with population of Muslims

https://heavenawaits.wordpress.com/muslim-behavior-with-population-increase/

Nice link..

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 04:16 AM
Further confirming my suspicion that "anonymous" is a BS state operation. The current establishment hates Trump (because he can not be bought off, like the other candidate money whores) and must stop him.

Right, because only the state wants to see Trump go down. Nobody else does. Just the state.

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 04:45 AM
Right, because only the state wants to see Trump go down. Nobody else does. Just the state.

I'm not talking about good public servants like many that frequent this board . . I'm talking about The big money sharks who engineered the 08 financial crisis and that have been looting the treasury ever since.

Trump played their game, knows who they are and how they did it and is firing subtle warning shots across their bow, things that are getting lost in all the bombast about racism and other stupid shit.

Anonymous is a Propaganda op. It's about managing perception."anonymous" is attacking ISIS. No wait "anonymous" is attacking the Klan. No wait "anonymous" is attacking Trump....oooh. scary!

You really think a Denial of Service attack on a fucking Twitter feed is gonna stop this juggernaught movement? Come on Man!

we're being offered a chance to put our own National interest first. Jump in for the big win Bitches. It's not too late. We're making America Great Again!

giggawatt
12-11-2015, 01:19 PM
Good Question. This type of scenario is happening regularly.

http://nypost.com/2015/12/09/students-demand-college-renames-lynch-building-because-of-racial-overtones/




Protesters at a Pennsylvania college are demanding that the school rename a building called Lynch Memorial Hall because of the racial overtones of the word “lynch.”

The group of students at Lebanon Valley College submitted a list of demands to the administrators, including nixing the name of the building devoted to the college’s former president, Clyde A. Lynch.

“All of the hate at this school makes me want to cry,” one student, Lacey Eriksen, wrote on Twitter about the protest.

Student organizers said the college needed to address “institutional injustices” on the campus.

“It’s a rare moment here at Lebanon Valley College,” Michael Schroeder, an associate professor of history, told PennLive outside a recent demonstration.

The demonstration Schroeder spoke at was closed to photos and video by organizers who sought to create a “safe space,” the site said.

A school spokesman called former president Lynch a “very important figure” in the history of the college. He is credited with guiding the school through the Great Depression.

Other demands by the group include a more diverse curriculum, more sensitivity training for staff and regular surveys of the racial climate on campus

I wanna say that these people are in for a rude awakening once they hit the real world but they're probably not.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 01:47 PM
Just saw this morning that it's pretty much set in stone: the British Parlaiment is going to ban Trump from the UK.

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 02:02 PM
Let's compare the day to day gang shooting # of deaths with the Mass shootings then. This year alone, we have had what, 15 mass shootings claiming what, 400 total lives between them?
Compare that to Chicago on it's own which had 216 for the first HALF a year. 99% of those are black on black crimes.. So why not do the same with blacks?

I'd like to think you are getting the point...but, sadly, I don't think you are

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 02:19 PM
Just saw this morning that it's pretty much set in stone: the British Parlaiment is going to ban Trump from the UK.

That will last until Rupert Murdoch invites the Donald over for Christmas dinner...

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 02:25 PM
That will last until Rupert Murdoch invites the Donald over for Christmas dinner...

I'm sorry, I'm not following what Rupert Murdoch has to do with this.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 02:30 PM
I'm sorry, I'm not following what Rupert Murdoch has to do with this.

Well, Rupert runs Fox News...I'm sure him and the Donald are buddies...Rupert is English, so I'm sure Trump has been to his place a few times...Now you got two Billionaires, one of whom has a lot of pull in England...so if Rupert says Trump can come visit, there isn't anyone who's gonna stop him.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 02:35 PM
Well, Rupert runs Fox News...I'm sure him and the Donald are buddies...Rupert is English, so I'm sure Trump has been to his place a few times...Now you got two Billionaires, one of whom has a lot of pull in England...so if Rupert says Trump can come visit, there isn't anyone who's gonna stop him.

Rupert Murdoch is Australian.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 02:42 PM
Rupert Murdoch is Australian.


My bad...either way, he owns the British Media, including Sky and their major papers. Money talks.

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 02:46 PM
Just saw this morning that it's pretty much set in stone: the British Parlaiment is going to ban Trump from the UK.

i guess they didn't get the memo that we are Citizen's of the United States and not Subjects of the In bred Queen. No one cares what the socialist unarmed Eurofags in England have to say.

They'll be under threat of Sharia law in 20 years. As Muhammed has become the most popular name for baby boys’ born in the UK

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/muhammed-really-is-most-popular-baby-name-in-the-uk-as-is-mohammed-muhammad-9895605.html

UncaRastus
12-11-2015, 02:46 PM
All that Trump would have to do is to get a phony passport. Or to claim that some people in the US are being mean to him. Or maybe, use a US submarine, and have the SEALs sneak him in.

I wonder, though, about sneaking. Is there a ghillie suit that can be cammoed up for the ocean? Maybe some seaweed, and a cute little turtle shell for use as his helmet?

;)

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 02:49 PM
i guess they didn't get the memo that we are Citizen's of the United States and not Subjects of the In bred Queen. No one cares what the socialist unarmed Eurofags in England have to say.

So these means that US citizens can come and go into and out of the UK as they please, because they're not subjects of the Queen?

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 02:51 PM
So these means that US citizens can come and go into and out of the UK as they please, because they're not subjects of the Queen?

No it means we don't give a flying fuck what they think.(See Pierce Morgan)

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 02:55 PM
No it means we don't give a flying fuck what they think.(See Pierce Morgan)

Oh, okay. Trump is still banned, so the UK still wins.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 03:01 PM
Oh, okay. Trump is still banned, so the UK still wins.I'd say they are making a pretty big wager that Trump isn't going to win the Presidency.

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 03:10 PM
Oh, okay. Trump is still banned, so the UK still wins.

First of all..... he's not "banned". Once a petition gets to a certain number that has to be debated in parliament.

Most likely It's all Moslem invaders that are signing the petition anyway.

Secondly.... The Bank of London and The Crown Corporation are the center of the beast and they can't afford to let Trump upset the Globalist applecart.

Our founding fathers' political philosophy originated with their Saxon forefathers not the King. The Constitution is based on Old Saxon Common law, which was restored to it's glory in the founding of the Republic.

The so called " American-English special relationship", just like the concept of "Judeo-Christian values" is a relatively recent phenomenon.

Juxtaposing the words like this is designed to confuse you, into thinking that the 2 have always been related, when in-fact they are historical polar opposites

Besides, Who needs em.We've been kicking their asses or bailing them out for 300 years.

Those British fags couldn't even keep their Magna Carta together.

http://magnacarta.cmp.uea.ac.uk/read/magna_carta_1215/Clause_10

There is no record of Jews living in England before 1066. Their arrival after the Norman Conquest appears to have been the direct result of royal policy, arising from William I’s financial needs and his experience of dealing with a Jewish community in Rouen. The close association of Jews with the crown proved lasting.2 Kings needed loans and taxes, Jews needed protection, against antagonisms arising both from their religion and from their financial activities, two currents of hostility which combined as a result of the near monopoly of the business of lending money at interest, a practice forbidden to Christians, which they had come to possess by around 1200.

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 03:11 PM
Oh, okay. Trump is still banned, so the UK still wins.

What do they win?

OK, as a nation they have the right to approve/disapprove people from coming in...do you really think Trump rises to that level justifying this kind of action?

Or, it is the UK stepping out of line and trying to influence U.S. politics...but, you're okay with it as long as it is in your favor?

I think this is B.S...not like he's an international criminal for having an opinion...

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 03:55 PM
What do they win?

OK, as a nation they have the right to approve/disapprove people from coming in...do you really think Trump rises to that level justifying this kind of action?

Or, it is the UK stepping out of line and trying to influence U.S. politics...but, you're okay with it as long as it is in your favor?

I think this is B.S...not like he's an international criminal for having an opinion...

What can I say, the UK is a sovereign nation with its own laws that are different from those of the US. Whether or not the UK is "justified" or you think this is "B.S.," well, I'm sure that when the British government makes a decision... that they don't take into consideration what's in accordance with American peoples' sense of justice.

So, what if they're trying to influence US politics... how is that "stepping out of line?" Does every country not try to do the same to each other? Is this not normal behavior?

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 03:58 PM
The irony that you're ok with, even celebrating, a country banning a white guy exercising free speech but have huge issues with deterring terrorists.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 04:00 PM
The irony that you're ok with, even celebrating, a country banning a white guy exercising free speech but have huge issues with deterring terrorists.

His free speech is protected by the US Constitution, not the British one.

TJMAC77SP
12-11-2015, 04:06 PM
His free speech is protected by the US Constitution, not the British one.


I think maybe you missed SJ's point. He wasn't speaking of laws but your thinking.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 04:06 PM
His free speech is protected by the US Constitution, not the British one.

They also support free speech, and they are talking about banning him (we'll have to see if it passes) for wanting to ban people...I find that pretty funny.

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 04:07 PM
What can I say, the UK is a sovereign nation with its own laws that are different from those of the US. Whether or not the UK is "justified" or you think this is "B.S.," well, I'm sure that when the British government makes a decision... that they don't take into consideration what's in accordance with American peoples' sense of justice.

So, what if they're trying to influence US politics... how is that "stepping out of line?" Does every country not try to do the same to each other? Is this not normal behavior?

Yes, of course they have the right to do so...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this doesn't pass and it's just an exercise of futility anyway.

BUT, having said that...seems like a bit of an abuse of process...I'm sure they have a procedure for banning individuals, etc. The purpose of that is maybe security or whatever...but, they are using that for political reasons...oh, cloaking him with the "Dangerous" label, but that's quite a stretch.

I'm not necessarily expecting them to check with me...OTOH, maybe I would vote to impose some measure of sanctions for them taking what, I think, is an abusive intrustion into our politics. He might be an idiot, but he's our idiot and we can handle him.

But, I don't really think anything will come of this

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 04:09 PM
They also support free speech, and they are talking about banning him (we'll have to see if it passes) for wanting to ban people...I find that pretty funny.

Do you know whether or not there are limitations on free speech there? As I understand it, Michael Savage was banned for similar reasons - hate speech that could incite violence.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 04:12 PM
Yes, of course they have the right to do so...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this doesn't pass and it's just an exercise of futility anyway.

BUT, having said that...seems like a bit of an abuse of process...I'm sure they have a procedure for banning individuals, etc. The purpose of that is maybe security or whatever...but, they are using that for political reasons...oh, cloaking him with the "Dangerous" label, but that's quite a stretch.

I'm not necessarily expecting them to check with me...OTOH, maybe I would vote to impose some measure of sanctions for them taking what, I think, is an abusive intrustion into our politics. He might be an idiot, but he's our idiot and we can handle him.

But, I don't really think anything will come of this

You're acting as though there isn't already a precedent. Here's a list of people banned from the UK I pulled from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_banned_from_entering_the_United_Kin gdom

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 04:24 PM
You're acting as though there isn't already a precedent. Here's a list of people banned from the UK I pulled from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_banned_from_entering_the_United_Kin gdom

Oh yeah...Michael Savage...

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 04:27 PM
Oh yeah...Michael Savage...

I'm gonna go out on a limb is say that most people would agree that Michael Savage is far less dangerous than Donald Trump, considering that the ban would be on the same basis.

Yeah, this is pretty much a slam dunk in Trump's case.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 04:33 PM
Do you know whether or not there are limitations on free speech there? As I understand it, Michael Savage was banned for similar reasons - hate speech that could incite violence.

I don't know the exact limitations, but I think that they have an easier time limiting it than we do. I could see, possibly, how Trump's language could be seen as "hate speech" but I think it very far from being hate speech that incites violence. At most, it's hate speech that prevents violence.

Don't forget, their conservatives are as, if not more, liberal than our liberals so when it comes to being PC, they've set the bar.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 04:45 PM
I don't know the exact limitations, but I think that they have an easier time limiting it than we do. I could see, possibly, how Trump's language could be seen as "hate speech" but I think it very far from being hate speech that incites violence. At most, it's hate speech that prevents violence.

Considering that his speech has ALREADY incited violence in the US (to my knowledge, this hasn't been the case with Michael Savage), they've got a pretty strong case.

Examples of the violence incited by Trump, you ask?

- The homeless Latino man in Boston that got jumped by two Trump supporters who admitted that they were inspired by Trump

- The Latino man who got jumped at a Trump rally in Florida, while others were chanting "USA! USA!" Police stood there and watched.

- The black man that got jumped at a Trump rally in Alabama. Trump's response? That he deserved to "get roughed up."

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 04:51 PM
Considering that his speech has ALREADY incited violence in the US (to my knowledge, this hasn't been the case with Michael Savage), they've got a pretty strong case.

Examples of the violence incited by Trump, you ask?

- The homeless Latino man in Boston that got jumped by two Trump supporters who admitted that they were inspired by Trump

- The Latino man who got jumped at a Trump rally in Florida, while others were chanting "USA! USA!" Police stood there and watched.

- The black man that got jumped at a Trump rally in Alabama. Trump's response? That he deserved to "get roughed up."

That's stretching it pretty far. That's like saying that BlackLivesMatter is inciting violence if someone who supports the movement attacks a white guy. It's just not true. Of course it's not a surprise to hear a liberal blame someone other than those actually committing the crimes.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 05:01 PM
That's stretching it pretty far. That's like saying that BlackLivesMatter is inciting violence if someone who supports the movement attacks a white guy. It's just not true. Of course it's not a surprise to hear a liberal blame someone other than those actually committing the crimes.

Maybe, but it's ultimately up to how the British people and government perceive it.

That said, I'm willing to bet that Brits aren't going to have the conservative white American mindset of exhausting every effort to find ways to give every possible benefit of the doubt to Donald Trump and people who think like him.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 05:09 PM
Maybe, but it's ultimately up to how the British people and government perceive it.

That said, I'm willing to bet that Brits aren't going to have the conservative white American mindset of exhausting every effort to find ways to give every possible benefit of the doubt to Donald Trump and people who think like him.

Here's what the Brits are, from 8 years of my experience. They are accepting of everything "alternative" to the point of being patronizing to the people they are "supporting". They think of themselves as very "progressive" yet you see anything with minorities/gays/etc and it's so overboard. The jokes are belittling, the stereotypes are accentuated, especially in their TV shows. So of course they are going to protest Trump. Hell, they'll probably make a skit about an Arab strapping a bomb to himself and setting it off in proximity to Trump. That's how misguided they are with their progressivism. You should try living there for a few months, then tell me how righteous they are.

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 05:10 PM
L


Which 2 were those?? Are you seriously labeling the Charleston shooting a 'terror attack'?
Or the one last week in Colorado as terrorism?? Since they were violent criminal attacks with the intent of achieving a political goal Though fear they were TEXTBOOK cases of terrorism.

From the FBI website I have bolded and underline the relevent parts.

18 U.S.C. § 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism”:

"International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:


Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.*

"Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:



Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;

Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and
Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.


What makes you think that ,Colorado Springs and Charleston were not terrorism? Both terrorist admitted political goals, both wanted to incite terror and both murdered people.

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 05:49 PM
Over 30,000 white women are raped by blacks in America each year.

Studies indicate that in greater than 75% of All cases the perpetrators had watched interracial pornography within 24 hours of the attack.

Therefore the evidence is clear that IR pornography incites violence against white women.

Now, your homework is to go research who funds the pornography industry?

The rapists should be thrown in jail for perpetrating hate crime and the parasites behind this filth should be rounded up and sent to Gitmo for commiting Domestic Terrorism!

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 05:58 PM
Maybe, but it's ultimately up to how the British people and government perceive it.

That said, I'm willing to bet that Brits aren't going to have the conservative white American mindset of exhausting every effort to find ways to give every possible benefit of the doubt to Donald Trump and people who think like him.

The same forces behind the media campaign to destroy Donald Trump in America also own the media in England.

The goal is to get 400 thousand Muhommeds to sign a petition, so that they can then create a media spectacle of the socialists in parliament pontificating about how a moderate Nationalist is a threat to global hummanity because he refuses to kiss the internationalist brownspot

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 06:10 PM
Here's what the Brits are, from 8 years of my experience. They are accepting of everything "alternative" to the point of being patronizing to the people they are "supporting". They think of themselves as very "progressive" yet you see anything with minorities/gays/etc and it's so overboard. The jokes are belittling, the stereotypes are accentuated, especially in their TV shows. So of course they are going to protest Trump. Hell, they'll probably make a skit about an Arab strapping a bomb to himself and setting it off in proximity to Trump. That's how misguided they are with their progressivism. You should try living there for a few months, then tell me how righteous they are.

I have and lived in Australia (Woomera) where all those characteristics are even stronger, I have no trouble with that it works very well for both countries just as it does for a Canada. They make sick joke, we have sick jokes as the 3 leaders in the Republican presidential slate. Their way is far less offensive

A simple question, he is very likely to break their laws, and break them quite publicly if he enters, He repeatedly lies and insults their nation. He want to stop millions of their citizens from being able to enter the US . Why should the let him in when he want to stop letting their citizens in and he is likely to break their laws?

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 06:14 PM
The same forces behind the media campaign to destroy Donald Trump in America also own the media in England.

The goal is to get 400 thousand Muhommeds to sign a petition, so that they can then create a media spectacle of the socialists in parliament pontificating about how a moderate Nationalist is a threat to global hummanity because he refuses to kiss the internationalist brownspot

It has already broken 530,000. The Brits learned to dislike fascists a couple of generations ago. It may hit a million before they decide in Parliament

Votes against barring him are nearing 6 percent of that though

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 06:18 PM
It has already broken 530,000. The Brits learned to dislike fascists a couple of generations ago. It may hit a million before they decide in Parliament

Votes against barring him are nearing 6 percent of that though

Won't make a bit of difference. I encounter lots of British tourist and expats here this time of year.

My research indicates that just like Americans they Love The Donald too!

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 06:22 PM
Won't make a bit of difference. I encounter lots of British tourist and expats here this time of year.

My research indicates that just like Americans they Love The Donald too!

This reminds me of the facebook comments section on a Trump fuck-up article, where there's always at least on white person that proclaims "Latinos LOVE Trump!"

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 06:24 PM
https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xat1/v/t1.0-9/12313886_1534496036872458_6911415022185405146_n.jp g?efg=eyJpIjoiYiJ9&oh=28d8fb429064429452287f5bf58e215d&oe=571FB298

Rainmaker
12-11-2015, 06:27 PM
This reminds me of the facebook comments section on a Trump fuck-up article, where there's always at least on white person that proclaims "Latinos LOVE Trump!"

First they ignore you.

Then they ridicule you.

Then they fight you.

Then you win!

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 06:53 PM
I have and lived in Australia (Woomera) where all those characteristics are even stronger, I have no trouble with that it works very well for both countries just as it does for a Canada. They make sick joke, we have sick jokes as the 3 leaders in the Republican presidential slate. Their way is far less offensive

A simple question, he is very likely to break their laws, and break them quite publicly if he enters, He repeatedly lies and insults their nation. He want to stop millions of their citizens from being able to enter the US . Why should the let him in when he want to stop letting their citizens in and he is likely to break their laws?

What laws is he likely to break if he enters England?

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 06:56 PM
What laws is he likely to break if he enters England?

If the ban goes through, he'll be breaking the law by entering.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:07 PM
If the ban goes through, he'll be breaking the law by entering.If he does, should he be thrown in jail? What if he has a baby while he's there...can he stay then? Live off their government?

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 07:11 PM
If he does, should he be thrown in jail? What if he has a baby while he's there...can he stay then? Live of their government?

The fuck do I look like? A British lawyer?

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:16 PM
The fuck do I look like? A British lawyer?

No...definitely not. They don't have many black lawyers over there.

I don't blame you for not answering, though. It puts you in a tough spot on illegal immigrants and what should be done with them.

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 07:18 PM
Ben Carson blows up and threatens to leave GOP over report of potential anti-Trump effort by party leaders

Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson released a fiery statement on Friday denouncing a reported meeting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-preparing-for-contested-convention/2015/12/10/d72574bc-9f73-11e5-8728-1af6af208198_story.html?postshare=5821449782081267&tid=ss_tw) attended by his party's top leaders earlier in the week. "If the leaders of the Republican Party want to destroy the party, they should continue to hold meetings like the one described in the Washington Post this morning," Carson said. The retired neurosurgeon even threatened to leave the GOP, referencing front-runner Donald Trump's own threats (http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-independent-poll-pledge-muslim-plan-2015-12) to run as an independent. "If this was the beginning of a plan to subvert the will of the voters and replace it with the will of the political elite, I assure you Donald Trump will not be the only one leaving the party," Carson said.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ben-carson-blows-threatens-leave-162532885.html



Ben might be looking to be on the Trump ticket...

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 07:19 PM
No...definitely not. They don't have many black lawyers over there.

I don't blame you for not answering, though. It puts you in a tough spot on illegal immigrants and what should be done with them.

No, it doesn't. First off, illegal immigrants aren't part of this discussion and secondly, different country; different laws. Thirdly, I'm not a Brit, so it's really not my place to say what they should or shouldn't do with immigrants.

I didn't even know that you were actually looking for a real answer to the question. I thought you were just trolling, since the answers to your question really does nothing to change the fact that... Trump is gonna get banned. If you want further details on what being "banned" means, then Google the phone number of a British lawyer.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:20 PM
Ben might be looking to be on the Trump ticket...What's interesting about that is, if Carson was to run as Trump's VP, then would all of his racist followers still support him?

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 07:22 PM
What's interesting about that is, if Carson was to run as Trump's VP, then would all of his racist followers still support him?

Yes. That will actually attract the racist followers.

Let's face it: Carson is used by racists as an "indisputable" black mouthpiece for them.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:23 PM
No, it doesn't. First off, illegal immigrants aren't part of this discussion and secondly, different country; different laws. Thirdly, I'm not a Brit, so it's really not my place to say what they should or shouldn't do with immigrants.

I didn't even know that you were actually looking for a real answer to the question. I thought you were just trolling, since the answers to your question really does nothing to change the fact that... Trump is gonna get banned. If you want further details on what being "banned" means, then Google the phone number of a British lawyer.

We'll see if he gets banned first. It's possible, but as I said, I don't think the British government is willing to take that big of a risk at this point. If anything, they'd wait 'til he's no longer in the race, if/when that happens.

As far as illegal immigrants, their policies are very similar to ours, and enforced about as well, too.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:25 PM
Yes. That will actually attract the racist followers.

Let's face it: Carson is used by racists as an "indisputable" black mouthpiece for them. We've already seen plenty of racism against Carson.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 07:33 PM
We've already seen plenty of racism against Carson.

Not until recently. He's already outlived his usefulness as the token black man on the GOP side, hence the position that he's in right now. We saw the same thing happen to Herman Cain the last time around.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:35 PM
Not until recently. He's already outlived his usefulness as the token black man on the GOP side, hence the position that he's in right now. We saw the same thing happen to Herman Cain the last time around.

It's a shame that every black man has to be a liberal or he's just a token. I know you've discussed it before, but why do blacks hate other blacks who don't think like the majority? Maybe that's another thread.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 07:37 PM
It's a shame that every black man has to be a liberal or he's just a token. I know you've discussed it before, but why do blacks hate other blacks who don't think like the majority? Maybe that's another thread.

SJ, you've heard me talk about poor whites who vote Republican too, so get off that. What they both have in common is that they've been bamboozled into voting against their own social and/or economic best interests.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:41 PM
SJ, you've heard me talk about poor whites who vote Republican too, so get off that. What they both have in common is that they've been bamboozled into voting against their own social and/or economic best interests.

Of course they have. Because the poverty levels always plummet when there's a liberal in office.

And I know I can't use that argument because if the levels get worse under a democrat, it's the fault of the policies of the republican before him...and if they get better under a democrat, it's because of the awesomeness of the democrat in office, in spite of the republican before him.

You know, it's not only the Republicans who have "token" minorities in their party. Just so happens that last time, the "token" won the election.

UncaRastus
12-11-2015, 07:44 PM
Let's have an exercise in thinking about the future. Let's say that Donald Trump gets elected. Then let's further say that he is having a nice tasty luncheon with some of the world's presidents, kings, mullahs, and so on.

He is talking to, say, Putin. The Trump is angry because Putin has put an embargo on vodka, to the US.

The Trump goes into one of his freedom of speech rants, and calls Putin a banged out, old school commy, and that the US makes better vodka, anyway.

Then he turns to the mullah and also the president of Iran, and tells them that they have 30 minutes to shut down their munitions plants, and to take their highly enriched uranium, or plutonium, or whatever, and to give it to us, or he will be pushing the button on the 'football', to have their country obliterated.

Then he turns to the president of France, and tells him to stop having their waiters being rude to the United States tourists, or he might mess up and punch another button by mistake, and that France would be french fried within minutes.

Then he turns to Japan and says that he is pulling out all of our troops, and that they have to go mano a mano against North Korea. Because we have been there for so many years, that's it's time for them to man up.

And so on.

OK, this may be a bit extreme, but my wife did bring up the point that if he becomes president, he may be a bit too aggressive and/or extreme, when talking to world leaders.

I can see him talking to a bunch of world leaders that he doesn't like, and him telling them all, "You're fired!"

Does anyone in here think that he might go to 'charm school,' to learn how to be more diplomatic? Or would it be more of a 'speak loudly , but carry an even bigger nuke'?

Remember, this is just an exercise, presupposing that Trump makes it into the POTUS position.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 07:47 PM
Of course they have. Because the poverty levels always plummet when there's a liberal in office.

And I know I can't use that argument because if the levels get worse under a democrat, it's the fault of the policies of the republican before him...and if they get better under a democrat, it's because of the awesomeness of the democrat in office, in spite of the republican before him.

You know, it's not only the Republicans who have "token" minorities in their party. Just so happens that last time, the "token" won the election.

Right... all those homeless people living in boxes that were almost unheard of before Reagan took office... yep, it's because Republicans reduce poverty. The booming economy under Clinton? All because Democrats increase poverty. Bush reduced poverty during his tenure, and we have all of the jobs lost in the automotive industry and the housing crisis to show for it.

Oh, all of those red states, especially the ones in the in the South.... they're so rich... because those Republicans are doing such a great job at fighting poverty...

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 07:47 PM
We'll see if he gets banned first. It's possible, but as I said, I don't think the British government is willing to take that big of a risk at this point. If anything, they'd wait 'til he's no longer in the race, if/when that happens.

As far as illegal immigrants, their policies are very similar to ours, and enforced about as well, too.

Off topic:

Much of western Europe has open borders...Driving from Germany to Austria Italy to Switzerland to France, etc....is about like driving from NY to Pennsylvania, to Delaware to Virginia....you just see a sign that says "Now entering"...except over there the road signs change language once you cross the border...but, you are still supposed to have your passport with you when you cross national borders...90% of the time, no one will check or ask for it.

they do however, occasionally set up at the border and check travel docs.

When I was stationed in Germany....been to France maybe half a dozen times without ever being asked for a passport or anything. This one time, we were going to Europa-park...it's like an amusement park in Germany, but it's close to the border with Germany and France.

Anyway...thinking we weren't leaving Germany, we did not bring our passports. However, our GPS does not care about borders and decided the most efficient route was actually entering France and using the freeway before crossing back over into Germany near the park.

Wouldn't you know it...this was the one time France had set up on the border checking passports....we were, essentially, attempting to enter France illegally. So, we were brought inside to fill out some forms and they entered us into the computer...ran some kind of check on us I guess. The officers just kept saying, "Don't worry, don't worry...it's gonna be okay.".

..which only kind of made us nervous because that's the same way the Tijuana cops talk, only they mean "It's gonna be okay as soon as I take you to the ATM"

....anywho, turned out to not be a big deal...took maybe 15 minutes and we were on our way. They did turn us around and wouldn't let us enter France, though. The actual drive wasn't that much of a difference and if I knew the roads better other than just following the GPS, I wouldn't have gone through France to begin with..

Anyway...just a story

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:49 PM
Let's have an exercise in thinking about the future. Let's say that Donald Trump gets elected. Then let's further say that he is having a nice tasty luncheon with some of the world's presidents, kings, mullahs, and so on.

He is talking to, say, Putin. The Trump is angry because Putin has put an embargo on vodka, to the US.

The Trump goes into one of his freedom of speech rants, and calls Putin a banged out, old school commy, and that the US makes better vodka, anyway.

Then he turns to the mullah and also the president of Iran, and tells them that they have 30 minutes to shut down their munitions plants, and to take their highly enriched uranium, or plutonium, or whatever, and to give it to us, or he will be pushing the button on the 'football', to have their country obliterated.

Then he turns to the president of France, and tells him to stop having their waiters being rude to the United States tourists, or he might mess up and punch another button by mistake, and that France would be french fried within minutes.

Then he turns to Japan and says that he is pulling out all of our troops, and that they have to go mano a mano against North Korea. Because we have been there for so many years, that's it's time for them to man up.

And so on.

OK, this may be a bit extreme, but my wife did bring up the point that if he becomes president, he may be a bit too aggressive and/or extreme, when talking to world leaders.

I can see him talking to a bunch of world leaders that he doesn't like, and him telling them all, "You're fired!"

Does anyone in here think that he might go to 'charm school,' to learn how to be more diplomatic? Or would it be more of a 'speak loudly , but carry an even bigger nuke'?

Remember, this is just an exercise, presupposing that Trump makes it into the POTUS position.

He can't become more diplomatic. If he did, he'd lose all support. He'd have to stay in character the entire presidency. There is no good outcome for him if he wins.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 07:54 PM
Right... all those homeless people living in boxes that were almost unheard of before Reagan took office... yep, it's because Republicans reduce poverty. The booming economy under Clinton? All because Democrats increase poverty. Bush reduced poverty during his tenure, and we have all of the jobs lost in the automotive industry and the housing crisis to show for it.

Oh, all of those red states, especially the ones in the in the South.... they're so rich... because those Republicans are doing such a great job at fighting poverty...

Here's the cause. It's off topic but I'm pretty sure I've talked about it before. Prior to the 80s, there were far fewer "two income" homes. Most households were still fairly traditional. In the 80s, it started to become popular for women to join the workplace. Now, simple math tells me that, even if there are the same amount of jobs, there are fewer available because the workforce is larger. This is going to lead to a much larger income gap as more educated households, more qualified households, have two people working while the less educated, less qualified households can't get good paying jobs that would have been available before.

What's also interesting is that I find that the northern states are much more racist than the southern states...much more segregated.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 08:06 PM
Here's the cause. It's off topic but I'm pretty sure I've talked about it before. Prior to the 80s, there were far fewer "two income" homes. Most households were still fairly traditional. In the 80s, it started to become popular for women to join the workplace. Now, simple math tells me that, even if there are the same amount of jobs, there are fewer available because the workforce is larger. This is going to lead to a much larger income gap as more educated households, more qualified households, have two people working while the less educated, less qualified households can't get good paying jobs that would have been available before.

That's actually not the cause. The government stopped funding mental hospitals under Reagan, so most of them shut down. The patients either ended up homeless or in jail.


What's also interesting is that I find that the northern states are much more racist than the southern states...much more segregated.

1. First, this is off topic. The topic is this: red states are still poorer. The red states are the ones with people living in abject poverty.

2. Having lived both up north and down south, I have to disagree that the north is "more racist." Yes, it's more segregated up north. But there's a reason for that. Up north, whites are generally middle class and higher. Down south, whites are more economically diverse. The poor actually make up a higher percentage of the white population down south.

So, what that means is that up north... where whites are generally middle class and higher... they actually have a choice in whether or not they want to live around blacks. If they don't want to be around blacks, they've got the money to not be around them.

Down south, there's a higher percentage of whites who don't have that choice. That makes racism in the south more confrontational, because people are going to see it right in their faces. Whereas, up north... it's more about ignoring each other.

That doesn't make one region more racist than the other. They just handle it differently.

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 08:06 PM
Does anyone in here think that he might go to 'charm school,' to learn how to be more diplomatic? Or would it be more of a 'speak loudly , but carry an even bigger nuke'?

Remember, this is just an exercise, presupposing that Trump makes it into the POTUS position.

I don't he'll go to charm school...but, don't think he'd be reacting militarily to not getting his way.

I could see him more using trade as a weapon of national interests...."you don't wanna do it our way, I'm just gonna take away this $45 billion dollars of business we've been bringing you."

Remains to be seen what the fallout of that will be...but, I think he's more of a "our money makes us right" kind of philosophy.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 08:13 PM
That's actually not the cause. The government stopped funding mental hospitals under Reagan, so most of them shut down. The patients either ended up homeless or in jail.



1. First, this is off topic. The topic is this: red states are still poorer. The red states are the ones with people living in abject poverty.

2. Having lived both up north and down south, I have to disagree that the north is "more racist." Yes, it's more segregated up north. But there's a reason for that. Up north, whites are generally middle class and higher. Down south, whites are more economically diverse. The poor actually make up a higher percentage of the white population down south.

So, what that means is that up north... where whites are generally middle class and higher... they actually have a choice in whether or not they want to live around blacks. If they don't want to be around blacks, they've got the money to not be around them.

Down south, there's a higher percentage of whites who don't have that choice. That makes racism in the south more confrontational, because people are going to see it right in their faces. Whereas, up north... it's more about ignoring each other.

That doesn't make one region more racist than the other. They just handle it differently.

Oh, ok. Thanks. I was stupid to think that there could be any cause other than the President not funding mental hospitals. Not sure where my head was.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-11-2015, 08:24 PM
Further confirming my suspicion that "anonymous" is a BS state operation. The current establishment hates Trump (because he can not be bought off, like the other candidate money whores) and must stop him.

Trump can't be bought off?

You must be drunk on cheap beer again.

He is owned by the Clintons and her supporters.

He isn't in the race to win. He is there to cause chaos in the Republican Party, so Hillary can win.

You've fell for it hook, line and sinker.

Trump isn't the hero you think he is, but by all means, pin your hopes to him.

It is going to be funny to see how disappointed you will be.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 08:37 PM
What if Trump actually wins, though? What does he do then?

From what I've seen in the polls - and social media and, well, what I'm observing personally among conservatives... Trump is going to win the nomination. A few months ago, I saw Rubio and Carson supporters here and there, but I don't see it anymore. Either they're voting for Trump, or they're undecided. I think Trump pretty much has the GOP nomination in the bag.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 08:40 PM
What if Trump actually wins, though? What does he do then?

From what I've seen in the polls - and social media and, well, what I'm observing personally among conservatives... Trump is going to win the nomination. A few months ago, I saw Rubio and Carson supporters here and there, but I don't see it anymore. Either they're voting for Trump, or they're undecided. I think Trump pretty much has the GOP nomination in the bag.

That clears the path for whichever democrat wins the nomination. Trump has 30-35% of GOP polls, so that's 65-70% that like someone else. 100% of dems and most independents will not vote Trump, and I doubt he gets more that 60% support from the GOP (and that's a high estimate). The democrat nominee will win in a landslide.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 08:43 PM
That clears the path for whichever democrat wins the nomination. Trump has 30-35% of GOP polls, so that's 65-70% that like someone else. 100% of dems and most independents will not vote Trump, and I doubt he gets more that 60% support from the GOP (and that's a high estimate). The democrat nominee will win in a landslide.

I'm not sure it's going to be that easy. You don't think that conservatives are going to, at least begrudgingly, vote for Trump just to be keep Clinton or Sanders out of the White House?

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 08:43 PM
What if Trump actually wins, though? What does he do then?

From what I've seen in the polls - and social media and, well, what I'm observing personally among conservatives... Trump is going to win the nomination. A few months ago, I saw Rubio and Carson supporters here and there, but I don't see it anymore. Either they're voting for Trump, or they're undecided. I think Trump pretty much has the GOP nomination in the bag.

Trump v. Clinton in the general?

I'm having a difficult time seeing anybody win...

Whoever wins, we have 4 more years of polarization, name calling, and disrespect of the office...

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 08:45 PM
I'm not sure it's going to be that easy. You don't think that conservatives are going to, at least begrudgingly, vote for Trump just to be keep Clinton or Sanders out of the White House?No, I think turnout would be extremely low for the GOP.

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 08:46 PM
Trump v. Clinton in the general?

I'm having a difficult time seeing anybody win...

Whoever wins, we have 4 more years of polarization, name calling, and disrespect of the office...

I think that's going to be the norm from now on. I'm beginning to think that polarization is getting so bad, that the United States might not be able to stay one country for much longer.

efmbman
12-11-2015, 09:06 PM
I think that's going to be the norm from now on. I'm beginning to think that polarization is getting so bad, that the United States might be able to stay one country for much longer.
If you meant to type "might not", I completely agree with you. Many may think that's a ridiculous theory, but I honestly think it will happen in my lifetime (I figure with my diet and drinking, I've got about 20 years left!)

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 09:14 PM
First they ignore you.

Then they ridicule you.

Then they fight you.

Then you win!
Or they curb stomp you to oblivion and obscurity like the Birchers, the Klan and the Nazis

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 09:16 PM
What laws is he likely to break if he enters England?
Hate speech laws, his standard stump speech would be a crime in most of the western world, that is why they barred the slightly less vile Michael Savage.

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 09:18 PM
If he does, should he be thrown in jail? What if he has a baby while he's there...can he stay then? Live off their government?
No they will put him into custody and them throw is scumbag but out of the country on the first available plane, Since he will never leave the airport doing so will be very easy

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 09:18 PM
If you meant to type "might not", I completely agree with you. Many may think that's a ridiculous theory, but I honestly think it will happen in my lifetime (I figure with my diet and drinking, I've got about 20 years left!)

I meant "might not," I went back and fixed it.

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 09:20 PM
Ben might be looking to be on the Trump ticket...

Would they please stop bluffing and independent?

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 09:24 PM
We'll see if he gets banned first. It's possible, but as I said, I don't think the British government is willing to take that big of a risk at this point. If anything, they'd wait 'til he's no longer in the race, if/when that happens.

As far as illegal immigrants, their policies are very similar to ours, and enforced about as well, too. What risk a would the British government be taking? It would be more of a risk to ignore the public. It would only be a risk if for some reason the American public decided to elect a psychopath and their odds-maker have Hillary as a prohibitive favorite to win.

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 09:33 PM
That clears the path for whichever democrat wins the nomination. Trump has 30-35% of GOP polls, so that's 65-70% that like someone else. 100% of dems and most independents will not vote Trump, and I doubt he gets more that 60% support from the GOP (and that's a high estimate). The democrat nominee will win in a landslide. That is what the Party is afraid of and a landslide that big will take the House and the Senate with it. I think the closest History has to that one Is Nixon-McCarthy (which as an aside was the last time two War veterans faced each other the Presidency. )

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 09:34 PM
Trump v. Clinton in the general?

I'm having a difficult time seeing anybody win...

Whoever wins, we have 4 more years of polarization, name calling, and disrespect of the office... There is nobody running on either side where that would not be the case

MikeKerriii
12-11-2015, 09:44 PM
I think that's going to be the norm from now on. I'm beginning to think that polarization is getting so bad, that the United States might not be able to stay one country for much longer.

It used to be that when Texans a talked about secession everyone argued about how bad an idea that was, now a growing minority is saying don't let the door hit you on the way out.

A nation without shared values is hard to maintain as a nation, and shared values are disappearing into extremism, we can't even agree on what freedom of religion means anymore, and that belief was a founding principle. "All men being created equal" will get attacked even on this board,m as will the idea that trials come before executions.

Bos Mutus
12-11-2015, 09:59 PM
There is nobody running on either side where that would not be the case

Some more than others..

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 10:09 PM
More violence committed by someone motivated by Trump's hate speech: a mosque in Coachella, CA just got firebombed.

Tell me again why Trump won't get banned from the UK, when others have been banned for much less?

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 10:16 PM
Hate speech laws, his standard stump speech would be a crime in most of the western world, that is why they barred the slightly less vile Michael Savage."Hate speech" simply because you disagree with him. Glad you didn't help write the Constitution.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 10:17 PM
What risk a would the British government be taking? It would be more of a risk to ignore the public. It would only be a risk if for some reason the American public decided to elect a psychopath and their odds-maker have Hillary as a prohibitive favorite to win.Let's see. Let's say that Trump wins the Presidency, and England gets involved in a war they want assistance with, and Trump says "Fuck you, you won't even let me in your country".

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 10:18 PM
That is what the Party is afraid of and a landslide that big will take the House and the Senate with it. I think the closest History has to that one Is Nixon-McCarthy (which as an aside was the last time two War veterans faced each other the Presidency. )No...landslide for Presidency...it won't affect Congress at all because Trump has alienated himself from the GOP and the GOP is making it clear they don't agree with him.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 10:19 PM
It used to be that when Texans a talked about secession everyone argued about how bad an idea that was, now a growing minority is saying don't let the door hit you on the way out.

A nation without shared values is hard to maintain as a nation, and shared values are disappearing into extremism, we can't even agree on what freedom of religion means anymore, and that belief was a founding principle. "All men being created equal" will get attacked even on this board,m as will the idea that trials come before executions.

And I'm sure you back shared values, as long as those values are yours.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 10:20 PM
More violence committed by someone motivated by Trump's hate speech: a mosque in Coachella, CA just got firebombed.

Tell me again why Trump won't get banned from the UK, when others have been banned for much less?

I must have missed his speech where he encouraged violence. Can you link the site?

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 10:33 PM
I must have missed his speech where he encouraged violence. Can you link the site?

Do sex offender registry sites tell people to go vandalize their neighbors property? Nope. But it paints them as being a threat to you and your family, so people react accordingly. Much like the way Trump paints Mexicans and Muslims.

Oh, and I thought you might like this link: http://www.ibtimes.com/white-nationalists-among-donald-trumps-most-enthusiastic-supporters-2220618

Notice how Rainmaker is Trump's biggest supporter on this page.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 10:53 PM
Do sex offender registry sites tell people to go vandalize their neighbors property? Nope. But it paints them as being a threat to you and your family, so people react accordingly. Much like the way Trump paints Mexicans and Muslims.

Oh, and I thought you might like this link: http://www.ibtimes.com/white-nationalists-among-donald-trumps-most-enthusiastic-supporters-2220618

Notice how Rainmaker is Trump's biggest supporter on this page.

Ah, of course...the TV show/Movie/Video Game made me do it...

So you think we should get rid of the sex offender registry?

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 11:00 PM
Ah, of course...the TV show/Movie/Video Game made me do it...

If that's what you want to reduce it to, then great. However, TV shows/movies/video games don't lead countries, nor do they aspire to.


So you think we should get rid of the sex offender registry?

Are you trying to pull a WJ5 with this one?

TJMAC77SP
12-11-2015, 11:19 PM
No, it doesn't. First off, illegal immigrants aren't part of this discussion and secondly, different country; different laws. Thirdly, I'm not a Brit, so it's really not my place to say what they should or shouldn't do with immigrants.

I didn't even know that you were actually looking for a real answer to the question. I thought you were just trolling, since the answers to your question really does nothing to change the fact that... Trump is gonna get banned. If you want further details on what being "banned" means, then Google the phone number of a British lawyer.

Wouldn't the ban and disregarding it be an immigration issue?

TJMAC77SP
12-11-2015, 11:29 PM
Off topic:

Much of western Europe has open borders...Driving from Germany to Austria Italy to Switzerland to France, etc....is about like driving from NY to Pennsylvania, to Delaware to Virginia....you just see a sign that says "Now entering"...except over there the road signs change language once you cross the border...but, you are still supposed to have your passport with you when you cross national borders...90% of the time, no one will check or ask for it.

they do however, occasionally set up at the border and check travel docs.

When I was stationed in Germany....been to France maybe half a dozen times without ever being asked for a passport or anything. This one time, we were going to Europa-park...it's like an amusement park in Germany, but it's close to the border with Germany and France.

Anyway...thinking we weren't leaving Germany, we did not bring our passports. However, our GPS does not care about borders and decided the most efficient route was actually entering France and using the freeway before crossing back over into Germany near the park.

Wouldn't you know it...this was the one time France had set up on the border checking passports....we were, essentially, attempting to enter France illegally. So, we were brought inside to fill out some forms and they entered us into the computer...ran some kind of check on us I guess. The officers just kept saying, "Don't worry, don't worry...it's gonna be okay.".

..which only kind of made us nervous because that's the same way the Tijuana cops talk, only they mean "It's gonna be okay as soon as I take you to the ATM"

....anywho, turned out to not be a big deal...took maybe 15 minutes and we were on our way. They did turn us around and wouldn't let us enter France, though. The actual drive wasn't that much of a difference and if I knew the roads better other than just following the GPS, I wouldn't have gone through France to begin with..

Anyway...just a story

Ok, you broke the cherry. This thread has gone down the rabbit hole anyway.

Prior to the establishment of the EU, while at Zweibucken (I was there TDY for 4 months) I invaded France. I was the on duty flight chief in a marked SP sedan and was enjoying the scenery after checking some off-base US property. I noticed trash on the side of the road, an absence of the ubiquitous white topped road markers and the signs now had French as the first language. I turned around and when I approached the Zoll station (which I had been oblivious to as I passed it the first time) I rolled up and told the cop "Flugplatz Polizei". He didn't even look down completely, just waved his hand back for me to proceed. I bought a few rounds as punishment for that.

TJMAC77SP
12-11-2015, 11:35 PM
More violence committed by someone motivated by Trump's hate speech: a mosque in Coachella, CA just got firebombed.

Tell me again why Trump won't get banned from the UK, when others have been banned for much less?

I heard about the fire but didn't know they had a suspect or confirmed that it was Trump inspired. Source?

Rusty Jones
12-11-2015, 11:39 PM
I heard about the fire but didn't know they had a suspect or confirmed that it was Trump inspired. Source?

An article that I saw on my facebook feed. I can't get it to come back up again. I'm gonna have to stay tuned for more of them.

TJMAC77SP
12-11-2015, 11:45 PM
Ok, back to the silly topic (IMO).

I just watched ABC news. Just about the last story was about Trump and his affect on the GOP and election.

Gave these statistics.

57% of Americans now disagree with Trump's remarks on Muslims. Doing the math that means 43% either agree or don't have an opinion on the matter.

"but"

42% of Republicans agree with his remarks. Again doing the math that means 58% either don't agree or have no opinion on the matter.

Anyone else see what I see?

TJMAC77SP
12-11-2015, 11:47 PM
An article that I saw on my facebook feed. I can't get it to come back up again. I'm gonna have to stay tuned for more of them.

The feed disappeared? Weird. Unless of course whoever posted it realized it simply isn't true......at least as of now.

There has not been an arrest. No suspects have been identified and certainly no motivation given.

EDIT: Perhaps this is where you saw it..........................

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/california-mosque-fire-bombed-by-trump-inspired-domestic-terrorist/

Really an opinion piece.

Of course Trump's remarks may well have inspired these attacks much like anti-police rhetoric made at events like made at BLM rallies very well may have inspired the killings (executions) of police officers. We should probably wait until it is a fact before saying it is a fact.

On a side note, I Googled 'number of cops executed since Ferguson'. I got through almost 4 pages of articles about black people killed by police until I finally found one that actually met my search parameters and that was only about the NYPD.

Maybe it's just my weak Google skills. We have many here with Jedi level Google skills perhaps someone can school me.

sandsjames
12-11-2015, 11:53 PM
If that's what you want to reduce it to, then great. However, TV shows/movies/video games don't lead countries, nor do they aspire to.



Are you trying to pull a WJ5 with this one?

In addition, you accused me of comparing Muslims to inanimate objects (guns) in my analogy yet you just compared them to sex offenders in yours. However, I'm not petty enough to claim that that was your intent...though it would make a great headline to make you sound like you hate muslims.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-12-2015, 12:19 AM
What if Trump actually wins, though? What does he do then?

From what I've seen in the polls - and social media and, well, what I'm observing personally among conservatives... Trump is going to win the nomination. A few months ago, I saw Rubio and Carson supporters here and there, but I don't see it anymore. Either they're voting for Trump, or they're undecided. I think Trump pretty much has the GOP nomination in the bag.

You are saying that Trump has the nomination in the bag before the first primary has been held?

Not likely.

Besides, I was just giving Rainmaker a dose of his own conspiracy medicine.

Did you catch his post about Saxon heritage a few pages ago?

Mjölnir
12-12-2015, 02:05 AM
That clears the path for whichever democrat wins the nomination. Trump has 30-35% of GOP polls, so that's 65-70% that like someone else. 100% of dems and most independents will not vote Trump, and I doubt he gets more that 60% support from the GOP (and that's a high estimate). The democrat nominee will win in a landslide.


That clears the path for whichever democrat wins the nomination. Trump has 30-35% of GOP polls, so that's 65-70% that like someone else. 100% of dems and most independents will not vote Trump, and I doubt he gets more that 60% support from the GOP (and that's a high estimate). The democrat nominee will win in a landslide.

Most of my political wonk friends agree with you.

Trump currently polls around 30-35% depending on the poll. As sandsjames said, that is 65-70% that are not supporting him.

What will be telling is in the next few weeks / months as lower tier candidates drop out where their supporters go. As that 1% here, 3% there start adding up things will get more interesting.

I agree, if Trump wins the GOP nomination the Democrat is going to win the election. National elections are decided by the moderates & their 'swing vote', and few moderates are going to vote for Trump.


I'm not sure it's going to be that easy. You don't think that conservatives are going to, at least begrudgingly, vote for Trump just to be keep Clinton or Sanders out of the White House?

Some will, sure. Some won't. Those who only look at the R behind the name will, those who are overtly fiscally conservative will. Those who are more moderate I think will have a harder time on it. I think it is more likely that many just decide not to play.

MikeKerriii
12-12-2015, 02:20 AM
Wouldn't the ban and disregarding it be an immigration issue?

An issue of British Immigration law, or if Parliament acts a law specifically aimed at Trump

MikeKerriii
12-12-2015, 02:24 AM
Ok, back to the silly topic (IMO).

I just watched ABC news. Just about the last story was about Trump and his affect on the GOP and election.

Gave these statistics.

57% of Americans now disagree with Trump's remarks on Muslims. Doing the math that means 43% either agree or don't have an opinion on the matter.

"but"

42% of Republicans agree with his remarks. Again doing the math that means 58% either don't agree or have no opinion on the matter.

Anyone else see what I see?

That is bad news for Trump, Since Republicans only make up about 25% of registered voters that is devastating news to the already small chance of Trump whining against even Bernie Bernie has 30 of 30% of the population in round-numbers Trump has 30% of 25% of the population, The numbers are from Nate Silvers blog.

Mjölnir
12-12-2015, 02:30 AM
Now, I disagree with Trump on a lot. His comments about Muslims are in many ways really off base. But, an interesting point that he brings up that can spawn conversation:

Our current immigration policies are in many ways flawed. Obviously something is amiss when the woman in the San Bernadino shooting had a presence on radical social media and was professing her support to / for groups wanting to harm Americans makes it past INS without a second look.

How would we react in the military if we had a fatality during an event? We all-stop on the evolution, we reconstruct the event, see what we can learn from it & what can be done better to keep our personnel safe, make recommended changes, implement that change then commence operations. We are having issues with dangerous people getting in the country and we are not taking an 'operational pause.'

Continuing to have weak screening of individuals coming into the country allows for dangerous individuals who wish to harm Americans to enter the country. Once inside the country, movement is unhindered and unmonitored (perimeter security is moderate, internal security is pretty weak.) Once inside the U.S. it is easy for someone who is determined to do harm to do it. Combine the immigration & security issues with the conflicting messages from the government:

"If you see something, say something", but the teachers in TX that though that kid built a bomb were labeled as racists for calling police. The school system is now being sued for $15 million.

Currently, we are doing nothing. The President gave a speech, neither party has introduced significant legislation to change the status quo. A non-politician political candidate with a penchant for putting his foot in his mouth is the only one really coming close to a necessary discussion on the relationship between immigration and security. The vast majority of immigrants are good people, there are bad apples in the bunch. Many are willing to ignore the possibility of the acts of a bad apple until the issue impacts them personally. In the simplest terms, our options pretty much boil down to:

1. If we want to throw the gates open, internal security is going to need erode the personal freedoms of Americans to keep them as safe as is demanded.

2. Tighten immigration policies to make it harder to get here, but once here security is minimal.

As Americans, we should be idealistic. America is the land of the free & the home of the brave. We were founded by immigrants and have a proud history of taking in the huddled masses yearning to breathe free. I would rather die a free man than live under tyranny. At the same time, living in the world as it is today, we have to be realistic too. If we make it easy for them to get here ... we are making it easy for them to harm us.

TJMAC77SP
12-12-2015, 02:42 AM
That is bad news for Trump, Since Republicans only make up about 25% of registered voters that is devastating news to the already small chance of Trump whining against even Bernie Bernie has 30 of 30% of the population in round-numbers Trump has 30% of 25% of the population, The numbers are from Nate Silvers blog.

First of all thank you for being predictable.

Secondly, Nate Silvers is better on ESPN.

Thirdly, I would rather rely on Pew. 25% of registered voters? 32% Democrat, 39% independent. Didn't that set off flags with you at all ?!?!?!? Don't you remember 47%. 2012 election.....51% Democrat, 47 % Republican.

BTW: Math fail for you. Integrity fail as well.

Bos Mutus
12-12-2015, 03:56 AM
"If you see something, say something", but the teachers in TX that though that kid built a bomb were labeled as racists for calling police. The school system is now being sued for $15 million.
.

This is a great dilemma...where are the lines....and the moral implications for those who honestly endeavor to recognize our own racist views...that may make us honestly and genuinely suspicious

Tough.

garhkal
12-12-2015, 04:17 AM
I'd like to think you are getting the point...but, sadly, I don't think you are

The point i was getting at, is if (like you and many dems) want to further restrict everyone's access to guns cause of all the mass shootings, then shouldn't the same logic apply to all the black on black killings??



I think this is B.S...not like he's an international criminal for having an opinion...

I also think its a load of BS. I doubt fully the British govt would, if trump wins the Election "Sorry bub, we don't want your head of state here"..
And as to the 'criminal for having an opinion', i DO feel there are quite a few people out there who WOULD love it if Trump got arrested for voicing his opinions as it goes against their liberal dogma.


That's stretching it pretty far. That's like saying that BlackLivesMatter is inciting violence if someone who supports the movement attacks a white guy. It's just not true. Of course it's not a surprise to hear a liberal blame someone other than those actually committing the crimes.

Or like Michael brown's father/mother did, when they said "BURN IT DOWN" to the crowd, and then some DID comit arson..
But the liberals in MI didn't go after them for inciting violence.


Since they were violent criminal attacks with the intent of achieving a political goal Though fear they were TEXTBOOK cases of terrorism.
..snip..

What makes you think that ,Colorado Springs and Charleston were not terrorism? Both terrorist admitted political goals, both wanted to incite terror and both murdered people.

i can MAYBE see the PP one cause of the insane rantings of the shooter in court yesterday. BUT what was the 'political change that Roof wanted?


Ben might be looking to be on the Trump ticket...

Good on Ben showing that he has values.. One of them being honor. THE GOP demanded all sign that pledge of allegiance to the GOP, but are now themselves showing no loyalty to their runners (well Trump at least)..


That's actually not the cause. The government stopped funding mental hospitals under Reagan, so most of them shut down. The patients either ended up homeless or in jail.


And who was it that pushed for those asylums to close down.. Certainly NOT reagan.


I'm not sure it's going to be that easy. You don't think that conservatives are going to, at least begrudgingly, vote for Trump just to be keep Clinton or Sanders out of the White House?

I have seen several people who say if JEB doesn't get the nod they won't even vote, even if that does mean Hillary gets into the WH (or sanders).. I know a # of others who are the same for Rubio. They just can't stand THEIR guy not getting the nod, and as such won't vote for anyone if that's the case..


What risk a would the British government be taking? It would be more of a risk to ignore the public. It would only be a risk if for some reason the American public decided to elect a psychopath and their odds-maker have Hillary as a prohibitive favorite to win.

But is it all the British public wanting NO Trump, or just the Muslims who have 'asylum seeked to get to the UK" who are wanting him banned?


Let's see. Let's say that Trump wins the Presidency, and England gets involved in a war they want assistance with, and Trump says "Fuck you, you won't even let me in your country".

I'd laugh..


Ok, back to the silly topic (IMO).

I just watched ABC news. Just about the last story was about Trump and his affect on the GOP and election.

Gave these statistics.

57% of Americans now disagree with Trump's remarks on Muslims. Doing the math that means 43% either agree or don't have an opinion on the matter.


And how many 'americans' were polled to come up with that 57%?

Bos Mutus
12-12-2015, 04:35 AM
The point i was getting at, is if (like you and many dems) want to further restrict everyone's access to guns cause of all the mass shootings, then shouldn't the same logic apply to all the black on black killings??


well...first of all...I've never advocated for restricting anyone's access to guns.

so my point here. Is the silliness of Trumps policy vs the Muslims would be just as silly if applied to whites...I wasn't actually advocating a policy of scrutinizing whites....a satirical subtlety you perhaps missed.

you seemed to be saying it would make sense to apply to blacks in Chicago....which is why I think you missed the point



I also think its a load of BS. I doubt fully the British govt would, if trump wins the Election "Sorry bub, we don't want your head of state here"..

i doubt this too



And as to the 'criminal for having an opinion', i DO feel there are quite a few people out there who WOULD love it if Trump got arrested for voicing his opinions as it goes against their liberal dogma.



not me.

i also think you have an irrational fear of liberals.

it would be equally true for me to say many conservatives would love to see <insert liberal> arrested for their opinions.


lets not focus n what some of the fringe people think or believe....tell me what you disagree with what I have stated

there are always 'some' liberals that state crazy things....not the majority, we are not the enemy.

there are 'some' conservatives that state crazy things, too....but I try not to attribute that too all conservatives.

TJMAC77SP
12-12-2015, 12:30 PM
And how many 'americans' were polled to come up with that 57%?

They didn't cite the details of the poll or even who did the poll and that wasn't my point. Hell, I wish the number who disapprove were higher. My point was the obvious bias reporting. It is the obvious 'do you walk or carry your lunch to school' stupidity.

MikeKerriii
12-12-2015, 06:51 PM
First of all thank you for being predictable.

Secondly, Nate Silvers is better on ESPN.

Thirdly, I would rather rely on Pew. 25% of registered voters? 32% Democrat, 39% independent. Didn't that set off flags with you at all ?!?!?!? Don't you remember 47%. 2012 election.....51% Democrat, 47 % Republican.

BTW: Math fail for you. Integrity fail as well.
Nate Silver s probably the most accurate pollster an interpreter of polls out there result counts and his are good.

You seem to be ignoring that fact that the largest political group in the US is usually the independents, but they swap that position often with the Democrats , Republicans are only about 25 percent of the voting population Democrats about half again larger and independents being about the same as Independents
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/party-identification
http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/political-attitudes/party-identification/
http://www.people-press.org/interactives/party-id-trend/

Up you are trying to hard to troll me, and getting a bit silly about it.

garhkal
12-12-2015, 07:58 PM
well...first of all...I've never advocated for restricting anyone's access to guns.

so my point here. Is the silliness of Trumps policy vs the Muslims would be just as silly if applied to whites...I wasn't actually advocating a policy of scrutinizing whites....a satirical subtlety you perhaps missed.

you seemed to be saying it would make sense to apply to blacks in Chicago....which is why I think you missed the point

I guess i did miss the subtly..




not me.

i also think you have an irrational fear of liberals.

it would be equally true for me to say many conservatives would love to see <insert liberal> arrested for their opinions.

Not irrational, when it seems its often proven BY how intolerant the left shows itself.

Rainmaker
12-12-2015, 10:09 PM
Notice how Rainmaker is Trump's biggest supporter on this page.

That's right Rusty. Rainmaker's not voting for any of these other worthless RINO Shitbirds or anyone from the other political party that refuses to represent My culture and My people.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdJB-qkfUHc

Rainmaker
12-13-2015, 01:03 AM
I just watched ABC news. Just about the last story was about Trump and his affect on the GOP and election.

Anyone else see what I see?

What I see is the talking heads for 6 months now saying..."But,But, But...He Can't win!"

IMO What they're missing is that 8 years ago most people listened to what the MSM said and assumed it to be true.

Whereas today most people just assume everything the MSM says to be false.




He is owned by the Clintons and her supporters.

He isn't in the race to win. He is there to cause chaos in the Republican Party, so Hillary can win.




Well, In a world gone mad with Bruce Genders, I guess anything is possible.

But, Trump doesn't need to Shill for Hillary. If Trump wanted to he could've just announced he was running as an independent from day 1 and condemned the RINO party to defeat.

Face it. Clinton=Bush. Period.

Both 2 sides of the same shekel.







there are always 'some' liberals that state crazy things....not the majority, we are not the enemy.
.

Nice of you to finally self ID as Liberal, instead of masquerading around as a "Moderate" and then spewing Reform Jewish-Atheist talking points across every thread.

We can never come to any understanding until people will at least admit where they are coming from.

TJMAC77SP
12-13-2015, 04:00 AM
Nate Silver s probably the most accurate pollster an interpreter of polls out there result counts and his are good.

You seem to be ignoring that fact that the largest political group in the US is usually the independents, but they swap that position often with the Democrats , Republicans are only about 25 percent of the voting population Democrats about half again larger and independents being about the same as Independents
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/party-identification
http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/political-attitudes/party-identification/
http://www.people-press.org/interactives/party-id-trend/

Up you are trying to hard to troll me, and getting a bit silly about it.

As usual I have to wonder who is typing for you. This last post is a prime example. It is like reading pidgin English trying to decipher what the fuck you meant.

Do you realize at all that the websites you cite do nothing to prove your point with regards to actual elections?


If what you said were true "largest political group in the US is usually the independents, but they swap that position often with the Democrats" then the national elections would be a much larger landslide. As it stands it is more like Romney described; which I am sure just drives you bonkers.

sandsjames
12-13-2015, 10:17 AM
If anyone wonders why Trump does so well in the polls, just look at this thread. Look at the number of pages (mostly) devoted to discussing him. It's the largest thread on here for some time.

To hurt Trump, people need to quit talking about him, quit devoting the majority of news reports to him. He's a soul eater. Take the souls away and he will have nothing to sustain him.

sandsjames
12-13-2015, 10:34 AM
This may be for a different thread, but it is also the theme of this thread, so I'll post it here.

The argument people have been using for not allowing refugees in to the country is that safety/security. Whether that's the real reason, who knows, but that's the reason given. As we approach Christmas, and as a Christian myself, all I can think of is that Jesus accepted and cared for all refugees, all the weak, all the poor knowing, without a doubt, that he was going to be killed. If we are going to follow the example that was set for us, as is required of us, then the "fear" of some rogue terrorist slipping through the system and putting us in danger is no excuse at all. It should strengthen our resolve to be the ones at the forefront of opening our hearts to the refugees. We can't be the loudest advocates of fighting the "War on Christianity" in a country that we claim was founded on Christian principles while, at the same time, acting in a manner that is opposed to the principles we are claiming to defend.

MikeKerriii
12-13-2015, 11:13 AM
As usual I have to wonder who is typing for you. This last post is a prime example. It is like reading pidgin English trying to decipher what the fuck you meant.

Do you realize at all that the websites you cite do nothing to prove your point with regards to actual elections?


If what you said were true "largest political group in the US is usually the independents, but they swap that position often with the Democrats" then the national elections would be a much larger landslide. As it stands it is more like Romney described; which I am sure just drives you bonkers.
The Independents decide the Presidency. If It was just Republicans and Democrats there would never be a Republican president again since the Democrat party is significantly enlarger and the Republican party is shrinking, and that was before the crazies took the lead.

So far there is no Republican candidate that reliably beats Hillary in the polls.

The three existing front-runners can't even reliably beat Bernie.

Bernie has more people in favor of him in the Polls than Trump does, since he has an equal percentage of a larger base.

MikeKerriii
12-13-2015, 11:17 AM
If anyone wonders why Trump does so well in the polls, just look at this thread. Look at the number of pages (mostly) devoted to discussing him. It's the largest thread on here for some time.

To hurt Trump, people need to quit talking about him, quit devoting the majority of news reports to him. He's a soul eater. Take the souls away and he will have nothing to sustain him.
I want Trump to win the Republican nomination, a Democratic House, Senate and White-House would be good for the nation. None of the Republican candidates with two digits numbers in the polls is much better.

MikeKerriii
12-13-2015, 11:20 AM
This may be for a different thread, but it is also the theme of this thread, so I'll post it here.

The argument people have been using for not allowing refugees in to the country is that safety/security. Whether that's the real reason, who knows, but that's the reason given. As we approach Christmas, and as a Christian myself, all I can think of is that Jesus accepted and cared for all refugees, all the weak, all the poor knowing, without a doubt, that he was going to be killed. If we are going to follow the example that was set for us, as is required of us, then the "fear" of some rogue terrorist slipping through the system and putting us in danger is no excuse at all. It should strengthen our resolve to be the ones at the forefront of opening our hearts to the refugees. We can't be the loudest advocates of fighting the "War on Christianity" in a country that we claim was founded on Christian principles while, at the same time, acting in a manner that is opposed to the principles we are claiming to defend.

I agree a nation based largely on religious freedom and populated largely by religious refugees, should not be banning a whole religion. Why are we letting fear replace our values?

sandsjames
12-13-2015, 11:20 AM
I want Trump to win the Republican nomination, a Democratic House, Senate and White-House would be good for the nation. None of the Republican candidates with two digits numbers in the polls is much better.

I can understand that. You're worried that a democrat can't be a valid candidate. It's like with shitty sports teams, they hope that the best player on the other team gets hurt so they don't have to play against him. It's really a pussy move.

Bos Mutus
12-13-2015, 02:54 PM
I guess i did miss the subtly..

Not irrational, when it seems its often proven BY how intolerant the left shows itself.

Confirmation bias

MikeKerriii
12-13-2015, 02:56 PM
I can understand that. You're worried that a democrat can't be a valid candidate. It's like with shitty sports teams, they hope that the best player on the other team gets hurt so they don't have to play against him. It's really a pussy move. Rainmaker does that kind of stuff far better than you do.

I said none of that it comes solely from your imagination and your desire to troll me. None of the leading candidates have much of a chance against Hillary or Bernie, mostly becasue the Republican base seems to, at least a majority of it, wants to nominate a nutcase. Even Bush has come out full bore in defense of religious bigotry, with his own immigration criteria.

The sports team analogy doesn't work since all the players on Trumps team are scrubs or 3rd string, as is shown by the fact that none of the rational ones can get over 10% nationally

I want the Republican party to dry up and blow away it has become toxic, filled with people Like Cruz, Steve King and Gohmert. It has a base that largely seems to think lying, bigotry, fascism and hate are admirable characteristics and that honesty and manners are PC.There are exceptions but they are becoming increasingly rare.

Sadly they need the nutcases survive at all, without them they would become irrelevant, that need was shown by the cowardice of most in replying to the Birthers and the "Obama is Muslim" crazies.

Plus, it is fun to watching a group intent on harming our country self-destruct.

MikeKerriii
12-13-2015, 03:03 PM
Not irrational, when it seems its often proven BY how intolerant the left shows itself. when has the Left put forward a major effort to deprive people of rights? The right is still pretending that SC decisions don't count after this summer when they lost their last major attempt to deprive people of rights.

What has the left done that had an adverse effect on you, or even seems intended to harm you or yours? What area are they hostile to you in?

sandsjames
12-13-2015, 06:04 PM
when has the Left put forward a major effort to deprive people of rights? The right is still pretending that SC decisions don't count after this summer when they lost their last major attempt to deprive people of rights.

What has the left done that had an adverse effect on you, or even seems intended to harm you or yours? What area are they hostile to you in?

What has the right done to you?

Rainmaker
12-13-2015, 06:18 PM
I want Trump to win the Republican nomination

Yeah....Of course you do Nelson...... That's why you've dropped dozens of posts bloviating about how Trump is a demagogue tyrant that's worse than Hitler,Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Beelzebub all combined....



Wow!

You've created a pretty big fantasy about Trump.

Not hardly. I'm not looking for a personal savior. I already have one of those.

But, what I am looking for is a candidate that puts The National interests ahead of International Corporate interests. I think Trump fits the bill


Watch his campaign go up in smoke when he loses big in the first two primaries.

Could be. But, I doubt it. Besides, You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

Just go back and re-read this thread, you've been saying it's over since July.

More likely that Trump wins the nomination and the corporate sponsors throw their money behind one of the goofball RINO's (JEB, Christie, Kasich, Rubbio) to split off and run as a 3rd party.

The Hillarnazi is damaged goods to the Israeli project. She can't oppose anything Obama (Because, she's facing a possible indictment) and therefore, she's beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood until the statute of limitations on her crimes are up. .

It's doubtful that she even beats Sanders.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-13-2015, 07:22 PM
Yeah....Of course you do Nelson...... That's why you've dropped dozens of posts bloviating about how Trump is a demagogue tyrant that's worse than Hitler,Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Beelzebub all combined....




Not hardly. I'm not looking for a personal savior. I already have one of those.

But, what I am looking for is a candidate that puts The National interests ahead of International Corporate interests. I think Trump fits the bill



Could be. But, I doubt it. What do you know? Go back and re read this thread, you've been saying it's over since July.

I think it's much More likely that Trump wins the nomination and the corporate sponsors throw their money behind one of the goofball RINO's (JEB, Christie, Kasich, Rubbio) to split off and run as a 3rd party.

The Hillarnazi is damaged goods to the Israeli project. Because, she's facing a possible indictment and she can't oppose anything Obama and therefore, she's going to be beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood until the statute of limitations on her crimes are up. I doubt she even beats Sanders.

It is always about Israel with you.

Why do you link Israel to every discussion?

Rainmaker
12-13-2015, 07:35 PM
It is always about Israel with you.

Why do you link Israel to every discussion?

because Rainmaker knows the difference between a scheme and an ethnicity when he sees one.

But, The more important question to ask yourself is how you could spend years as analyst and not recognize the obvious, when it's right in front of your face?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbkQddEDPs0

Absinthe Anecdote
12-13-2015, 08:13 PM
because Rainmaker knows the difference between a scheme and an ethnicity when he sees one.

Explain this a little more please. What is the scheme being played here?




But, The more important question to ask yourself is how you could spend years as analyst and not recognize the obvious, when it's right in front of your face?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbkQddEDPs0

Countries spy on each other, and your point would be what?

garhkal
12-13-2015, 08:59 PM
I want Trump to win the Republican nomination, a Democratic House, Senate and White-House would be good for the nation. None of the Republican candidates with two digits numbers in the polls is much better.

Why do you think if trump wins the GOP nod, that it automatically means HIllary (or whom ever wins the democratic nod) is going to win the presidential race??


Plus, it is fun to watching a group intent on harming our country self-destruct.

How do you figure? Dems are responsible for every sanctuary city/state, a wide open border and lack of border control. The failed Fast and furious gun running issue, IRS targetting of conservative groups, and racking our national debt up MORE than every prior POTUS combined...

MikeKerriii
12-13-2015, 10:45 PM
a bad post ...

MikeKerriii
12-13-2015, 11:06 PM
Why do you think if trump wins the GOP nod, that it automatically means HIllary (or whom ever wins the democratic nod) is going to win the presidential race??Perhaps because 40% of the population admits they fear hisPrsidency, The favt that America is nt ready to elect a facist, and he can't even count on get much more than middiling fraction of the vote in the generals election for the Republican base. he is a candidate with a very loyal base, that is also a pretty damned small base being about 305 of a party that has 25% of the population, outside that base even among Republicans he is widely despised. Demagogues and fascists have a poor history in American politics You can ask he ghosts of Huey Lewis, Lester Maddox and Fr. Coughlin

This alone is a good enough reason to despise him and every thing he stands for, you might think religious bigotry is fine But the nation was built a different concept, and it was built by refugees for the most part.
http://themoderatevoice.com/another-white-headstone-at-arlington-speaks-to-us/

The draft dodger bragging about how is is so military is sadly pathetic also, the are tens of millions of American's from the ages of 18 to over a hundred that are far more military that he is, Did I mention that he is delusional?




How do you figure? Dems are responsible for every sanctuary city/state, a wide open border and lack of border control. The failed Fast and furious gun running issue, IRS targetting of conservative groups, and racking our national debt up MORE than every prior POTUS combined...Because I believe that starting wars for personal an financial reasons is a bad then, I know women, Muslims and gay people. I believe that cutting taxes for the rich while screwing the budget and the economy is a vile a idea. And the biggest reason is unlike Trump, his supporters and the much of the Republican base I am not scared witless.

MikeKerriii
12-13-2015, 11:11 PM
weird dupe post

Absinthe Anecdote
12-13-2015, 11:43 PM
a bad post ...

The majority of your posts are that way.

sandsjames
12-14-2015, 12:14 AM
Perhaps because 40% of the population admits they fear hisPrsidency, The favt that America is nt ready to elect a facist, and he can't even count on get much more than middiling fraction of the vote in the generals election for the Republican base. he is a candidate with a very loyal base, that is also a pretty damned small base being about 305 of a party that has 25% of the population, outside that base even among Republicans he is widely despised. Demagogues and fascists have a poor history in American politics You can ask he ghosts of Huey Lewis, Lester Maddox and Fr. Coughlin

This alone is a good enough reason to despise him and every thing he stands for, you might think religious bigotry is fine But the nation was built a different concept, and it was built by refugees for the most part.
http://themoderatevoice.com/another-white-headstone-at-arlington-speaks-to-us/

The draft dodger bragging about how is is so military is sadly pathetic also, the are tens of millions of American's from the ages of 18 to over a hundred that are far more military that he is, Did I mention that he is delusional?


Because I believe that starting wars for personal an financial reasons is a bad then, I know women, Muslims and gay people. I believe that cutting taxes for the rich while screwing the budget and the economy is a vile a idea. And the biggest reason is unlike Trump, his supporters and the much of the Republican base I am not scared witless.

I hate to keep harping on this, but it's so difficult to read your posts because of how poorly written they are. It's not even just spelling and grammar, it's just incoherent. You may want to have the other person who posts under your name to do it full time because they do a pretty good job making it readable.

Rainmaker
12-14-2015, 12:18 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbkQddEDPs0

Countries spy on each other, and your point would be what?

That 4 part Fox series is about as damning as it can get from an open source.

It's still hard to believe that the chamber of commerce lackey Rupert Murdoch ever even allowed it to be aired. .

The implication is that Israeli agents have compromised virtually all US government agencies and have the goods on everybody.

Israel undoubtedly knew that the 9-11 terror attacks were imminent, but refused to share the information, that could've prevented the death of 3,000+ Americans.

The only other possibility is that they shared it and it was intentionally suppressed. In which case some money changer warmonger mother fuckers need to be strung up for treason.

Key players in the United States know it. But, it's career suicide (or worse) to voice it.

If you served 20+ years in the Military and yet still fail to see how this could be an inherent conflict of interest,

then please make your aliyah now and get the hell out of our country.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-14-2015, 01:22 AM
That 4 part Fox series is about as damning as it can get from an open source.

It's still hard to believe that the chamber of commerce lackey Rupert Murdoch ever even allowed it to be aired. .

The implication is that Israeli agents have compromised virtually all US government agencies and have the goods on everybody.

Israel undoubtedly knew that the 9-11 terror attacks were imminent, but refused to share the information, that could've prevented the death of 3,000+ Americans.

The only other possibility is that they shared it and it was intentionally suppressed. In which case some money changer warmonger mother fuckers need to be strung up for treason.

Key players in the United States know it. But, it's career suicide (or worse) to voice it.

If you served 20+ years in the Military and yet still fail to see how this could be an inherent conflict of interest,

then please make your aliyah now and get the hell out of our country.

You really don't know what you are talking about.

Rainmaker
12-14-2015, 01:26 AM
You really don't know what you are talking about.

Ok, I come here to receive information as well as to inform . so, Explain this a little more please.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-14-2015, 01:42 AM
Ok, I come here to receive information as well as to inform . so, Explain this a little more please.

Oh no, you are the one dropping fantastic claims about the Israelis knowing about 911.

Back up your big claims.

Rainmaker
12-14-2015, 02:10 AM
Oh no, you are the one dropping fantastic claims about the Israelis knowing about 911.

Back up your big claims.

Israel wants a destabilized Syria, Lebanon and Iraq and Egypt, Iran so it can control them.

Israel is supposedly a great ally and a part of the US-led "Anti-Terror Coalition" but curiously Al Qaeda/ISIS is never bombed or otherwise engaged by Israeli forces . and In-fact Israel provides medical care for injured Al Qaeda/ISIS fighters so that they can return to the battlefield in Syria, and AL Qaeda/ ISIS never attacks Israel. The prime black market for ISIS oil being smuggled through Turkey by Erdogan's son is Israel. All of Western Civilization is being flooded with Millions of migrants and refugees displaced from revolutions/wars covertly being launched against Israel's sworn enemies. While Israel is Unable to accept so much as 1 "Non Jewish" refugee. Hezbollah is Fighting ISIS but, Bibi Netanyahoo goes in front of the UN and The US Congress (against the wishes of the POTUS) AND US media tell us they're killing each other because, they both want the same thing. to establish a caliphate. Of course all this is coincidental and anyone who thinks otherwise is a "conspiracy theorist" and an "anti-Semite". because there's no smoking gun. I realize that criticizing them in any way whatsoever may upset some people and get you censured. But, it's time to call a spade a spade. 4 Million people and counting have been killed in the "Global war on terror" including a few friends of mine. I could go on forever. but, you get the idea. Thank you in advance for the "insider insight" and your stimulating contributions to the conversation.

MikeKerriii
12-14-2015, 02:11 AM
I hate to keep harping on this, but it's so difficult to read your posts because of how poorly written they are. It's not even just spelling and grammar, it's just incoherent. You may want to have the other person who posts under your name to do it full time because they do a pretty good job making it readable.

You don't hate to keep harping, you make a point of twisting and nit picking on my posts as you did on the one about the relative size of the parties, It saves you from having to deal with facts.

garhkal
12-14-2015, 04:44 AM
Perhaps because 40% of the population admits they fear hisPrsidency, The favt that America is nt ready to elect a facist, and he can't even count on get much more than middiling fraction of the vote in the generals election for the Republican base.

And which 40% is that? 48% feared obama and voted for Romney.



Because I believe that starting wars for personal an financial reasons is a bad then, I know women, Muslims and gay people. I believe that cutting taxes for the rich while screwing the budget and the economy is a vile a idea. And the biggest reason is unlike Trump, his supporters and the much of the Republican base I am not scared witless.

And when has trump said he would start a war for personal or financial reasons?

Absinthe Anecdote
12-14-2015, 08:41 AM
Israel wants a destabilized Syria, Lebanon and Iraq and Egypt, Iran so it can control them.

Israel is supposedly a great ally and a part of the US-led "Anti-Terror Coalition" but curiously Al Qaeda/ISIS is never bombed or otherwise engaged by Israeli forces . and In-fact Israel provides medical care for injured Al Qaeda/ISIS fighters so that they can return to the battlefield in Syria, and AL Qaeda/ ISIS never attacks Israel. The prime black market for ISIS oil being smuggled through Turkey by Erdogan's son is Israel. All of Western Civilization is being flooded with Millions of migrants and refugees displaced from revolutions/wars covertly being launched against Israel's sworn enemies. While Israel is Unable to accept so much as 1 "Non Jewish" refugee. Hamas is Fighting ISIS but, Bibi Netanyahoo goes in front of the UN and The US Congress (against the wishes of the POTUS) AND US media tell us they're killing each other because, they both want the same thing. to establish a caliphate. Of course all this is coincidental and anyone who thinks otherwise is a "conspiracy theorist" and an "anti-Semite". because there's no smoking gun. I realize that criticizing them in any way whatsoever may upset some people and get you censured. But, it's time to call a spade a spade. 4 Million people and counting have been killed in the "Global war on terror" including a few friends of mine. I could go on forever. but, you get the idea. Thank you in advance for the "insider insight" and your stimulating contributions to the conversation.

You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

If anything, what is happening in Syria is a proxy war between Iran and its many Suni rivals.

It isn't Israel pulling all the strings.

sandsjames
12-14-2015, 10:38 AM
You don't hate to keep harping, you make a point of twisting and nit picking on my posts as you did on the one about the relative size of the parties, It saves you from having to deal with facts.

I wasn't discussing the relative size of the parties with you. That was someone else. But your typing and sentence structure here was good. Thanks for that.

Rainmaker
12-14-2015, 11:20 AM
You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

If anything, what is happening in Syria is a proxy way between Iran and its many Suni rivals.

It isn't Israel pulling all the strings.

Oh ok. Thanks for stepping up with the clarification.

I almost got "self radicalized" by a blog! I don't know what I was thinking.

Happy Hanukkah. Israel is awesome!

giggawatt
12-14-2015, 11:41 AM
Mike, you need to do everyone ITT a favor. Slow down when you type. Re-read what you typed before you hit "post". Or put on your glasses and then type. Turn on spell check or whatever program your posting device uses.

Seriously, SJ isn't just nitpicking. Multiple posters have addressed your horribly constructed posts. It's nothing personal. You get your point across better when you construct your posts better with both correct grammar and syntax.

To take TJ's line, "Read carefully, think, then write thoughtfully."

giggawatt
12-14-2015, 12:10 PM
The majority of your posts are that way.

http://i.imgur.com/QONVIyz.gif

MikeKerriii
12-14-2015, 03:25 PM
And which 40% is that? 48% feared Obama and voted for Romney. The 40% that are afraid of a fascist being the most powerful man on Earth, or having a thin-skinned bigoted psychopath with delusions of grandeur in charge the nuclear arsenal ? There is reason to fear a president that as Jeb Bush puts is is "unhinged".

A psychopath arrogant and ignorant enough to think that the can simply order things making the death penalty laws change by executive order.

48% of Americans voted against him, only a few idiots were afraid of him, and I would bet that a large chunk of those wear white hoods on weekends.

You can vote against someone without fear or hatred, I don't think that any of the Republican presidents, since Ike, have been good Presidents but I did not fear any of them. I served under Nixon, a very corrupt man, but I did not fear the SOB. Most of them were probably decent men if IMO wrong many issues.

I can's say that about Cruz or Trump . Carson is just a befuddled clown now and that would be a bit scary. I would vote against all of the rest but I don't fear them,.




And when has trump said he would start a war for personal or financial reasons?The last Republican President did so. Trump is likely to do so for a perceived insult or, with his current behavior an example, when his poll numbers sag.

garhkal
12-15-2015, 03:56 AM
The 40% that are afraid of a fascist being the most powerful man on Earth, or having a thin-skinned bigoted psychopath with delusions of grandeur in charge the nuclear arsenal ? There is reason to fear a president that as Jeb Bush puts is is "unhinged"..

That's funny, i see MORE examples of Obama being the fascist and unhinged one around here.

Rusty Jones
12-15-2015, 10:34 AM
That's funny, i see MORE examples of Obama being the fascist and unhinged one around here.

Ah, the classic "I know you are but what am I" move. Conservatives love that! They'd be better off trying to justify Trump's fascism instead.

Rusty Jones
12-15-2015, 03:33 PM
More Trump-inspired racially motived violence:

http://usuncut.com/politics/donald-trump-supporters-yell-shoot-him-sieg-heil-at-black-lives-matter-protester/

Rainmaker
12-15-2015, 03:59 PM
More Trump-inspired racially motived violence:

http://usuncut.com/politics/donald-trump-supporters-yell-shoot-him-sieg-heil-at-black-lives-matter-protester/

A childhood friend of mine became a Union Rep in the Electrical workers union. Over beers one night, he told me that A common tactic that they used was called "salting" a job.

Basically, they'd plant workers on jobs wherever non-union labor was being used. They engaged in all kinds of despicable activity, even going so far as to intentionally wire the buildings up wrong, to sabotage the projects and intimidate anyone that dared to go against their little mafia.

Rusty Jones
12-15-2015, 04:05 PM
A childhood friend of mine became a Union Rep in the Electrical workers union. Over beers one night, he told me that A common tactic that they used was called "salting" a job.

Basically, they'd plant workers on jobs wherever non-union labor was being used. They engaged in all kinds of despicable activity, even going so far as to intentionally wire the buildings up wrong, to sabotage the projects and intimidate anyone that dared to go against their little mafia.

Yep, I knew you'd accuse them of being "plants."

MikeKerriii
12-15-2015, 05:49 PM
That's funny, i see MORE examples of Obama being the fascist and unhinged one around here.

That is funny, I doubt you can find one that meats the definition of Fascist. Do you even know what the word means?

MikeKerriii
12-15-2015, 05:50 PM
Ah, the classic "I know you are but what am I" move. Conservatives love that! They'd be better off trying to justify Trump's fascism instead.
I doubt that more that a few percent know what the word means, and those are too smart to try to justify the unjustifiable.

Rainmaker
12-15-2015, 06:06 PM
Yep, I knew you'd accuse them of being "plants."

It should be obvious to anyone with an IQ over 85, that these people are plants being paid by subversives to "salt" the Trump rally's in order to equate anyone that doesn't embrace the continued flooding of our country with Foreigners with the Nazis

sandsjames
12-15-2015, 06:17 PM
It should be obvious to anyone with an IQ over 85, that these people are plants being paid by subversives to "salt" the Trump rally's in order to equate anyone that doesn't embrace the continued flooding of our country with Foreigners with the Nazis

I don't necessarily agree that they are plants, but what I find funny is that the protesters don't seem to realize that every time they show up it give Trump what he wants and he gets a bump in numbers.

Rusty Jones
12-15-2015, 06:18 PM
I don't necessarily agree that they are plants, but what I find funny is that the protesters don't seem to realize that every time they show up it give Trump what he wants and he gets a bump in numbers.

Wait a sec... weren't you in denial the whole time that this is what made Trump popular?

Rainmaker
12-15-2015, 06:22 PM
Wait a sec... weren't you in denial the whole time that this is what made Trump popular?

Is it possible that the Don's "salting" his own rally's? Genius!

sandsjames
12-15-2015, 06:24 PM
Wait a sec... weren't you in denial the whole time that this is what made Trump popular?

I don't think so. I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong but I've been pretty consistent in stating that the best way to hurt Trump is to quit giving him what he wants. The only thing I've denied is that his motives are racist.

Rusty Jones
12-15-2015, 06:26 PM
I don't think so. I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong but I've been pretty consistent in stating that the best way to hurt Trump is to quit giving him what he wants. The only thing I've denied is that his motives are racist.

If his motives weren't racist then, clearly, he wouldn't attract people his crowds shouting "sieg heil." Wouldn't you agree?

sandsjames
12-15-2015, 06:31 PM
If his motives weren't racist then, clearly, he wouldn't attract people his crowds shouting "sieg heil." Wouldn't you agree?

No, I wouldn't. I really think we'll get nowhere with this, as usual, but Obama attracts people who hate rich white guys because he's put a big focus on the lower class...that doesn't make me think that Obama hates rich white guys. Hillary attracts man-hating lesbians, that doesn't mean that I think Hillary hates men.

Rainmaker
12-15-2015, 06:53 PM
If his motives weren't racist then, clearly, he wouldn't attract people his crowds shouting "sieg heil." Wouldn't you agree?

Funny this stuff starts a week after Trump told the Jewish Republican Coalition that He wanted their support but, not their money.

so Let's see. Trump has a Jewish daughter. Hundreds of Jewish partners Invested in his company, campaigned for Netanyahoo. so, of course to the foot-soldiers in the Muslim-Socialst Democratic Party he's clearly a Billionaire skin head

sandsjames
12-15-2015, 06:58 PM
Funny this stuff starts a week after Trump told the Jewish Republican Coalition that He wanted their support but, not their money.

so Let's see. Trump has a Jewish daughter. Hundreds of Jewish partners Invested in his company, campaigned for Netanyahoo. so, of course to the foot-soldiers in the Muslim-Socialst Democratic Party he's clearly a Billionaire skin head

So are you supporting him because of his support for Israel or because he won't support Israel? I'm confused.

Rainmaker
12-15-2015, 08:11 PM
So are you supporting him because of his support for Israel or because he won't support Israel? I'm confused.

You really want to know? I didn't come to this lightly. I actually disliked Trump at first.

If you actually look at Trump's platform a lot of it really is actually quite moderate (probably more than I'd like).

I'm supporting Trump for a variety of reasons.

The main one being that because, he's self-funded, so, he's the only candidate in either party (other than Maybe Sanders) that's not beholden to Corporate Global interests.

As far as Israel goes. It's side issue. and ties into the bigger issue of being held hostage by corporate money.

So, Supporting Israel is one thing.

Unconditional, Blind obedience to a foreign power just because, you're beholden to their lobbying money or your religious ideology is another.

I think Trump will support Israel (and that's fine).

But, I think putting Israeli interests ahead of what's in our own national interest is counterproductive.

This is getting long. and These guys here can't go more than 2 posts w/o screaming about perceived racism and Nazi's and fascists (just like they do with the tea party) and quite frankly I often egg them on for my own amusement.

I've been semi-active in Tea Party since, I retired from the military and I haven't ever seen any Aryan nation types running around there.

But, I wouldn't be surprised if the media constantly comparing him to the 2nd coming of Hitler won't attract them.

Rainmaker
12-15-2015, 08:41 PM
but Obama attracts people who hate rich white guys

Which is really amusing because Obama's train wreck economy has made a shit ton of money for a few rich white guys

MikeKerriii
12-16-2015, 03:35 AM
Trump once again proves that he is a complete idiot, and that he just pull his ideas out of his rear. If he had talked to someone that had the slightest clue he would not have come of up with the massive idiocy.

http://www.vox.com/2015/12/15/10259820/donald-trump-gop-debate-internet

The internet was expressly designed for data to get around blockages, it did so very well when it was an Military/education system with a few hundred nodes, and the more nodes available the better it works at the square of the number of interconnected nodes Now there are a billion plus nodes.

Of course it you completely cut the US off from the entire internet and telephone systems and had the government individually approve every text, web-page and e-mail before they are allowed to be sent, you could have something that does what he wishes As long, that is as you didn't have anyone smarter than a turnip trying to get around it.

Even a murderous totalitarian state like China can't pull it off with a level of success that is not laughable and he thinks it can be done in a democracy?

Rainmaker
12-16-2015, 06:50 PM
Trump once again proves that he is a complete idiot, and that he just pull his ideas out of his rear. If he had talked to someone that had the slightest clue he would not have come of up with the massive idiocy.

http://www.vox.com/2015/12/15/10259820/donald-trump-gop-debate-internet

The internet was expressly designed for data to get around blockages, it did so very well when it was an Military/education system with a few hundred nodes, and the more nodes available the better it works at the square of the number of interconnected nodes Now there are a billion plus nodes.

Of course it you completely cut the US off from the entire internet and telephone systems and had the government individually approve every text, web-page and e-mail before they are allowed to be sent, you could have something that does what he wishes As long, that is as you didn't have anyone smarter than a turnip trying to get around it.

Even a murderous totalitarian state like China can't pull it off with a level of success that is not laughable and he thinks it can be done in a democracy?

Non-issue. They said on the teevee that "anonymous" declared war & was going to shut down both ISIS and Trump's internet access.

MikeKerriii
12-19-2015, 05:16 PM
Trump supporters are really "tough", 41% of them want to bomb an imaginary country. Even imaginary brown people scare them!

9% are opposed

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/12/trump-leads-grows-nationally-41-of-his-voters-want-to-bomb-country-from-aladdin-clinton-maintains-bi.html

MikeKerriii
12-19-2015, 07:25 PM
I will not call this Trump spokesperson slime, Slime has done nothing to warrant the comparison. Raving lunatic, idiot and all around sick puppy will have to do.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/12/trump-spokesperson-why-bother-having-nuclear-weapons-if-youre-afraid-to-use-them/

“What good does it do to have a good nuclear triad if you’re afraid to use it?”

Trump pays this waste of good O2 to speak for him, She is the perfect spokesperson for a psychopath like Trump.

garhkal
12-19-2015, 07:32 PM
I will not call this Trump spokesperson slime, Slime has done nothing to warrant the comparison. Raving lunatic, idiot and all around sick puppy will have to do.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/12/trump-spokesperson-why-bother-having-nuclear-weapons-if-youre-afraid-to-use-them/

“What good does it do to have a good nuclear triad if you’re afraid to use it?”

Trump pays this waste of good O2 to speak for him, She is the perfect spokesperson for a psychopath like Trump.

And to me both Hillary and Sanders are just as much a waste of good oxygen.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-19-2015, 08:42 PM
First of all..... he's not "banned". Once a petition gets to a certain number that has to be debated in parliament.

Most likely It's all Moslem invaders that are signing the petition anyway.

Secondly.... The Bank of London and The Crown Corporation are the center of the beast and they can't afford to let Trump upset the Globalist applecart.

Our founding fathers' political philosophy originated with their Saxon forefathers not the King. The Constitution is based on Old Saxon Common law, which was restored to it's glory in the founding of the Republic.


Juxtaposing the words like this is designed to confuse you, into thinking that the 2 have always been related, when in-fact they are historical polar opposites

Besides, Who needs em.We've been kicking their asses or bailing them out for 300 years.

Those British fags couldn't even keep their Magna Carta together.

http://magnacarta.cmp.uea.ac.uk/read/magna_carta_1215/Clause_10

There is no record of Jews living in England before 1066. Their arrival after the Norman Conquest appears to have been the direct result of royal policy, arising from William I’s financial needs and his experience of dealing with a Jewish community in Rouen. The close association of Jews with the crown proved lasting.2 Kings needed loans and taxes, Jews needed protection, against antagonisms arising both from their religion and from their financial activities, two currents of hostility which combined as a result of the near monopoly of the business of lending money at interest, a practice forbidden to Christians, which they had come to possess by around 1200.

This comment about Saxons struck me as curious.

Wouldn't you know that there is a a Neo Nazi website called New Saxons with links to the American Legion.

Is that we're you were radicalized?

MikeKerriii
12-20-2015, 02:47 AM
And to me both Hillary and Sanders are just as much a waste of good oxygen.

Putting the US into the same category as Hitlers Germany is a bizarre way to make "American great again"

Did you miss the simple fact that she, in her vile bigoted hatred and utter ignorance. was talking about mass murder on a scale not seen since Mao, Hitler or Stalin. You don't seem find the wholesale slaughter of innocents such a bad thing, is that becasue they are brown or of the wrong faith?

Hell, Stalin and Mao would have blanched at her willingness to kill a a global scale. They were smart enough to be afraid to Nuclear weapons, anyone that is not is a full on psychopath and stupid as a rock also.

What have they ever said that equals that level of banal evil?

Rainmaker
12-20-2015, 02:58 AM
This comment about Saxons struck me as curious.

No shit. Why am I not surprised?

You've repeatedly demonstrated here that your ignorance of both American history and the contents of the Constitution is overwhelming.

"Anglo-Saxon studies made a powerful contribution to Thomas Jefferson's development of public concepts of American identity and nationalism in ways that have been elided by scholars preoccupied with Jefferson's classicism. Jefferson's comprehensive survey of Anglo-Saxon grammar, language, law and emigration provided him with a precedent for revolution and helped him develop a model of American nationhood."


https://repository.uwa.edu.au/R/-?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=9392&local_base=GEN01-INS01


Wouldn't you know that there is a a Neo Nazi website called New Saxons with links to the American Legion.

Is that we're you were radicalized?

Man, whoever wrote this for you must be beyond stupid.

You may want to try reading a few books once in a while.

I'd recommend Brian Steele's book "Thomas Jefferson and American Nationhood" and Jon Meacham's "Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power" for starters.

But, take it slow Ok?

Because, I'm sure you'll find it a marked change from all the anti-white and anti-male multiculturalism garbage you've been cramming into your feeble little mind in "school"

Rainmaker
12-20-2015, 04:08 AM
Absinthe Anecdote. And By the way, if you're going to reply to one of my posts and accuse me of being a Neo Nazi you should at least cite my post its entirety, and not edit out the key point.

you left out the following....

"The so called " American-English special relationship", just like the concept of "Judeo-Christian values" is a relatively recent phenomenon.

Juxtaposing the words like this is designed to confuse you, into thinking that the 2 have always been related, when in-fact they are historical polar opposites"

Absinthe Anecdote
12-20-2015, 04:59 AM
Absinthe Anecdote. And By the way, if you're going to reply to one of my posts and accuse me of being a Neo Nazi you should at least cite my post its entirety, and not edit out the key point.

you left out the following....

"The so called " American-English special relationship", just like the concept of "Judeo-Christian values" is a relatively recent phenomenon.

Juxtaposing the words like this is designed to confuse you, into thinking that the 2 have always been related, when in-fact they are historical polar opposites"

You are right, your "key point" is even more racist than what I was focusing on. I should have kept it in there.

By the way, here is an article from Veteran's Today that talks about racism in the American Legion.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2009/07/10/racism-resurgent-in-veterans-groups/

I'm not surprised that you are associated with American Legion with the way you talk in here.

Also, why are you getting so huffy.

You are posting racist crap in here on a daily basis.

You spent over a solid year making fun of blacks with your "nomsayin" routine before I embarrassed you into stopping it.

Now you are ramping up your 9-11 conspiracy garbage and revisionist Saxon history crap.

You deserve to be called out on this.

MikeKerriii
12-20-2015, 03:25 PM
Young love among fascists is so "charming'/s Or a rather a fascist tyrant and a wannabe.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/263869-trump-nobodys-proven-putin-killed-journalists

UncaRastus
12-20-2015, 04:20 PM
Mike, you know that if The Trump ever attains POTUS status, he will learn that Congress is not going to allow him his present claims on how America is going to be run. The VP will, in the end, be telling the POTUS what to do, as President.

He would end becoming a Talking Head (of State). That is, if he isn't impeached after his first few months in office.

Or, he could settle down and lead the country correctly, after a few months of Congress telling him 'no'.

That's the way I see things happening in the future, if he somehow becomes the POTUS. And that is a big if.

If he does make it, I am not walking around, giving the outthrust arm salute to anybody.

He's a 'feel good' kind of a campaigner. If he ever makes it into office, he will be very put out, to find that his claims to make the USA great again don't happen, just because he says that it will.

Of course, this is imo, only.

MikeKerriii
12-20-2015, 04:30 PM
Mike, you know that if The Trump ever attains POTUS status, he will learn that Congress is not going to allow him his present claims on how America is going to be run. The VP will, in the end, be telling the POTUS what to do, as President.

He would end becoming a Talking Head (of State). That is, if he isn't impeached after his first few months in office.

Or, he could settle down and lead the country correctly, after a few months of Congress telling him 'no'.

That's the way I see things happening in the future, if he somehow becomes the POTUS. And that is a big if.

If he does make it, I am not walking around, giving the outthrust arm salute to anybody.

He's a 'feel good' kind of a campaigner. If he ever makes it into office, he will be very put out, to find that his claims to make the USA great again don't happen, just because he says that it will.

Of course, this is imo, only.

You left out the option his role model used. A "Reichstag fire" followed by rule by decree. The German people thought the democratic institutions and laws would keep them safe also, I fear you are just whistle past the graveyard. Read the stuff his hired spokespeople and followers say, many seemingly would be happy pushing people into ovens.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-20-2015, 05:49 PM
No shit. Why am I not surprised?

You've repeatedly demonstrated here that your ignorance of both American history and the contents of the Constitution is overwhelming.

"Anglo-Saxon studies made a powerful contribution to Thomas Jefferson's development of public concepts of American identity and nationalism in ways that have been elided by scholars preoccupied with Jefferson's classicism. Jefferson's comprehensive survey of Anglo-Saxon grammar, language, law and emigration provided him with a precedent for revolution and helped him develop a model of American nationhood."


https://repository.uwa.edu.au/R/-?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=9392&local_base=GEN01-INS01

Whatever.

After seeing you make post after post that references Saxons, I began to get curious. For the past couple of months it has been "Saxon this" and "Saxon that" with you.

"Saxon Saxon Saxon"

Constant chattering about Saxons seemed rather odd to me.

Plus, we all know you are in the American Legion.

So, a quick Google search reveals New Saxon linkage to the American Legion.

Is this the same group of clowns that had you spewing all that Saint Pius X crap over the summer?

Who was it that radicalized you?

Rainmaker
12-20-2015, 05:51 PM
You are right, your "key point" is even more racist than what I was focusing on. I should have kept it in there.

How is it "Racist' to point out that the term 'Judaic-Christianity' is an oxymoron?

One religion teaches that salvation is available to all mankind. The other teaches that 14 million people are God's chosen elect and the rest of humanity will either be blessed or cursed according to how they treat them.

Race is not Religion. You do agree with that premise? or don't you?


By the way, here is an article from Veteran's Today that talks about racism in the American Legion.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2009/07/10/racism-resurgent-in-veterans-groups/

I'm not surprised that you are associated with American Legion with the way you talk in here.

Veteran's today is a front website and regular contributor to "PressTV".

They're about as much of a veteran's organization as AIPAC is a Christian organization.

Your increased posting of Pravda and Iranian Propaganda here lately has not gone unnoticed.

Maybe, it's you that's been "self-radicalized" and needs watching?


Also, why are you getting so huffy.

You are posting racist crap in here on a daily basis.

You spent over a solid year making fun of blacks with your "nomsayin" routine before I embarrassed you into stopping it.

Now you are ramping up your 9-11 conspiracy garbage and revisionist Saxon history crap.

You deserve to be called out on this.

Oh ok. I feel so bad now. I feel so guilty for millions of Jews being expelled from Europe for 800 years and every other Nation on Earth for the last 5,000 years.

all those poor people persecuted (before I was born) for no good reason whatsoever, other than their superior culture.

So, to make amends for my white guilt, i'll hold off on posting verses taken from the Talmud and pointing out what they have to say about Jesus Christ,

will it help to sooth your little baby persecution complex, if I tell you that most Jews are not Zionists and that most Zionists are not jews?

garhkal
12-20-2015, 06:10 PM
Putting the US into the same category as Hitlers Germany is a bizarre way to make "American great again"

Did you miss the simple fact that she, in her vile bigoted hatred and utter ignorance. was talking about mass murder on a scale not seen since Mao, Hitler or Stalin. You don't seem find the wholesale slaughter of innocents such a bad thing, is that becasue they are brown or of the wrong faith?


Come again?? Are we on about the same people here??

Rainmaker
12-20-2015, 06:16 PM
You left out the option his role model used. A "Reichstag fire" followed by rule by decree. The German people thought the democratic institutions and laws would keep them safe also, I fear you are just whistle past the graveyard. Read the stuff his hired spokespeople and followers say, many seemingly would be happy pushing people into ovens.


shhhh...stop warning everyone how Donald Trump is the 2nd coming of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, Vlad the Impaler, Genghis Kahn, Attila the Hun, Beelzebub and Lucifer all combined!

You said you really wanted him to win the GOP Nomination........ Remember Mike?

Absinthe Anecdote
12-20-2015, 06:32 PM
shhhh...stop warning everyone how Donald Trump is the 2nd coming of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, Vlad the Impaler, Genghis Kahn, Attila the Hun, Beelzebub and Lucifer all combined!

You said you really wanted him to win the GOP Nomination........ Remember Mike?

Is he a Saxon?

MikeKerriii
12-20-2015, 06:48 PM
shhhh...stop warning everyone how Donald Trump is the 2nd coming of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, Vlad the Impaler, Genghis Kahn, Attila the Hun, Beelzebub and Lucifer all combined!

You said you really wanted him to win the GOP Nomination........ Remember Mike?

I want t him to win the GOP nomination so he can finish off the Destruction of the GOP

MikeKerriii
12-20-2015, 07:06 PM
Come again?? Are we on about the same people here??Yes we are, you are just not paying attention

Choose a few minorities to attack: Check and double check
Attack the disabled'; Check
Think strength is more important that judgement or morality: Check
Hire crazy and dangerous sycophants to speak for you: Check
Lie , then repeat the lie until your dim-witted followers think it is true: Check, double check and check to many times to count
Admire publicly fellow fascists: Check
Imagine that you can create laws by decree: Check
An utter disregardful for US and International Law: Check
Advocating war crimes: Check
Capitalize on fear: Check


I suspect that Trumps followers who would not be in favor of kill the dirty (fill in the blank) are quite rare, Is suspect that most of them would need several blanks to list all their grudges

Did you read the link I posted above? That bigoted psychopath still works for Trump

UncaRastus
12-20-2015, 07:25 PM
On the subject of Israel, Trump added, "Sheldon knows that nobody will be more loyal to Israel than Donald Trump."

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/republican-donor-adelson-trump-may-aligning-israel-003125447--finance.html

Oh, my. OK. I now join you in supporting Trump, RM.

;)

Rainmaker
12-21-2015, 03:00 AM
On the subject of Israel, Trump added, "Sheldon knows that nobody will be more loyal to Israel than Donald Trump."

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/republican-donor-adelson-trump-may-aligning-israel-003125447--finance.html

Oh, my. OK. I now join you in supporting Trump, RM.

;)

yes Trump is very supportive of Israel.

To understand how Donald Trump works you first have to read his book.

Trump's been negotiating real estate and finance deals with New York City elitist jews for over 40 years.

so,unlike these other bozo's he's not going to give up all his leverage, by pledging unconditional alegiance to a foreign country Israel.

Adelson already pulled his money from plan A (JEB) after Trump crushed him and gave it to plan B (Rubio). Rubio is toast because of his record on amnesty. Cruz is plan C.

garhkal
12-21-2015, 05:50 AM
Yes we are, you are just not paying attention

Choose a few minorities to attack: Check and double check
Attack the disabled'; Check
Think strength is more important that judgement or morality: Check
Hire crazy and dangerous sycophants to speak for you: Check
Lie , then repeat the lie until your dim-witted followers think it is true: Check, double check and check to many times to count
Admire publicly fellow fascists: Check
Imagine that you can create laws by decree: Check
An utter disregardful for US and International Law: Check
Advocating war crimes: Check
Capitalize on fear: Check


Let's see, a good # of that can be applied to Hillary.
Chose certani groups to attack (Christian conservatives) Check
Think lying like crazy, breaking the law etc, is ok, just as long as it's her and her fellow dems.. check.
Imagine you can create laws by decree, check..
Capitalizes on fear (we don't want trump in) check..

MikeKerriii
12-21-2015, 06:56 AM
Let's see, a good # of that can be applied to Hillary.
Chose certani groups to attack (Christian conservatives) Check
Think lying like crazy, breaking the law etc, is ok, just as long as it's her and her fellow dems.. check.
Imagine you can create laws by decree, check..
Capitalizes on fear (we don't want trump in) check..

How has she "attacked' Cristian conservatives?

What law has she broken? Be be specific

What law has she tried or even proposed to be established by decree?

Oppose a political opponent is fear mongering? Can you give a single example of her fear mongering?

I can back any of the items I listed with examples, can you do so for any of yours?

Absinthe Anecdote
12-21-2015, 10:01 AM
yes Trump is very supportive of Israel.

To understand how Donald Trump works you first have to read his book.

Trump's been negotiating real estate and finance deals with New York City elitist jews for over 40 years.

so,unlike these other bozo's he's not going to give up all his leverage, by pledging unconditional alegiance to a foreign country Israel.

Adelson already pulled his money from plan A (JEB) after Trump crushed him and gave it to plan B (Rubio). Rubio is toast because of his record on amnesty. Cruz is plan C.

It also helps if you use your imagination and create a mythology about him.

To further bolster your fantasy of Trump it helps if you're the kind of guy who puts a sombrero on Uncle Sam and then gets radicalized at the American Legion by new Saxons.

Rusty Jones
12-21-2015, 12:23 PM
By the way, here is an article from Veteran's Today that talks about racism in the American Legion.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2009/07/10/racism-resurgent-in-veterans-groups/

Interesting thing about that article is where he questioned why those offended won't speak up.

The answer to that is simple: in the age of the internet, there's a big effort to shame anyone "offended" by something. In reality, this is an effort for offenders to silence their targets or stop them from retaliating. They're put into a position where speaking up or retaliating causes them to fail some bullshit "thick skin test" that the person doing the shit-talking just gave them.

Let us also not forget that the military churns out conservatives. Unless you're of exceptionally strong mind, even the most liberal people will end up conservative by the time they finish basic training.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-21-2015, 01:02 PM
Interesting thing about that article is where he questioned why those offended won't speak up.

The answer to that is simple: in the age of the internet, there's a big effort to shame anyone "offended" by something. In reality, this is an effort for offenders to silence their targets or stop them from retaliating. They're put into a position where speaking up or retaliating causes them to fail some bullshit "thick skin test" that the person doing the shit-talking just gave them.

Let us also not forget that the military churns out conservatives. Unless you're of exceptionally strong mind, even the most liberal people will end up conservative by the time they finish basic training.

Good point.

Let us also remember that American Legion posts in Florida radicalize people by soaking their brains in cheep beer.

We have seen evidence of these radicals who have been fed a bunch of fairy tales about Saxony and Trump show up here.

It is all "Saxon this" and "Trump that" with that crowd.

"Saxon Saxon Saxon! Trump Trump Trump!"

It won't be long until a certain person starts calling for a Saxon homeland.

Rusty Jones
12-21-2015, 01:21 PM
Good point.

Let us also remember that American Legion posts in Florida radicalize people by soaking their brains in cheep beer.

We have seen evidence of these radicals who have been fed a bunch of fairy tales about Saxony and Trump show up here.

It is all "Saxon this" and "Trump that" with that crowd.

"Saxon Saxon Saxon! Trump Trump Trump!"

It won't be long until a certain person starts calling for a Saxon homeland.

Technically, there are four: Saxony in Germany; and Essex, Sussex, and Wessex in England (which means lands of the East Saxons, South Saxons, and West Saxons; respectively).

I've love to send them there, but I doubt Germany or the UK would take them.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-21-2015, 01:40 PM
Technically, there are four: Saxony in Germany; and Essex, Sussex, and Wessex in England (which means lands of the East Saxons, South Saxons, and West Saxons; respectively).

I've love to send them there, but I doubt Germany or the UK would take them.

I'm sure they would balk at the idea and claim that the traditional Saxon homeland has been defiled by immigrants.

Did you notice Rainmaker trying to unlink the term Anglo-Saxon a couple of posts ago?

Mjölnir
12-21-2015, 01:40 PM
Interesting thing about that article is where he questioned why those offended won't speak up.

The answer to that is simple: in the age of the internet, there's a big effort to shame anyone "offended" by something. In reality, this is an effort for offenders to silence their targets or stop them from retaliating. They're put into a position where speaking up or retaliating causes them to fail some bullshit "thick skin test" that the person doing the shit-talking just gave them.

Let us also not forget that the military churns out conservatives. Unless you're of exceptionally strong mind, even the most liberal people will end up conservative by the time they finish basic training.

Good points.

I do in some ways see efforts to shame people who get offended by things. I also see in many cases a hyper-sensitivity as well.

I feel that there is a right to free speech, not a right to not be offended. That said, a professional environment is one that at least tries to not offend those working there.

I disagree (to an extent) on the military being a conservative assembly line. There are many conservative principles that also align with military thinking, but also many liberal ones as well. I don't think it is those who have an exceptionally strong mind who remain liberal, but those who believe what they believe. I think there is also a tendency (in the military) for people to become more conservative the older they get (going back to the article's points). Many of the veteran's service organizations that I have visited are 'older' and tend to be more conservative. I have seen a few individuals who are disrespectful to President Obama, I don't think it is endemic of the organization itself, but will say that even among my military friends who are liberal, there is a sentiment that President Obama is not overly supportive of the military (in some cases I agree, in others I don't.)

UncaRastus
12-21-2015, 02:57 PM
I tried to read Mein Kampf, but it was so boring that I used it as tinder instead. Uncle Adi would have been proud with the book burning, ja?

Is there a Cliff's Notes published on Trump's book? I finally stopped reading science fiction and fantasy, and I would need Cliff's Notes to wrap my head about that book. Did he win a Hugo Award, or something?

;)

Rainmaker
12-21-2015, 04:36 PM
I want t him to win the GOP nomination so he can finish off the Destruction of the GOP

Well if you really want him to win then,You might wanna stop warning us 6 times a day how dangerous he is.

all this talk about 'fascism' is really scary to some people!

Hell Absinthe Anecdote is already pissing in his little panties every time he hears the word 'Saxon' as it is.

Rainmaker
12-21-2015, 05:07 PM
Interesting thing about that article is where he questioned why those offended won't speak up.

The answer to that is simple: in the age of the internet, there's a big effort to shame anyone "offended" by something. In reality, this is an effort for offenders to silence their targets or stop them from retaliating. They're put into a position where speaking up or retaliating causes them to fail some bullshit "thick skin test" that the person doing the shit-talking just gave them.

.

The answer's even simpler than that.

The reason there's no outrage is because the article's premise (That you're more likely to hear the word nigger than hello in a VFW or American Legion post) is ridiculous.

TJMAC77SP
12-21-2015, 05:14 PM
Let us also not forget that the military churns out conservatives. Unless you're of exceptionally strong mind, even the most liberal people will end up conservative by the time they finish basic training.

Let me guess.............you are one of the 'exceptionally strong minded'?

Rusty Jones
12-21-2015, 05:16 PM
Let me guess.............you are one of the 'exceptionally strong minded'?

I don't have to guess: you're not.

Rainmaker
12-21-2015, 05:16 PM
Did you notice Rainmaker trying to unlink the term Anglo-Saxon a couple of posts ago?

Watching you trying to form a conclusion is like watching a retard trying to fuck a football

If your analysis here is representative of the other work you do. it explains ALOT!

No wonder the half wits in the 'intelligence community' can't find their collective ass with a search warrant.

How did you even get near a SCIF?

It's unbelievable that they'd ever let you do anything more than checking an ID or guarding an empty hangar.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-21-2015, 05:42 PM
Well if you really want him to win then,You might wanna stop warning us 6 times a day how dangerous he is.

all this talk about 'fascism' is really scary to some people!

Hell Absinthe Anecdote is already pissing in his little panties every time he hears the word 'Saxon' as it is.

It is rather telling that many American Legion posts have chosen the name Saxon for their baseball team mascots in the last few years.

http://www.legion.org/baseball/teams/2013/wa/94576

It coincides with the association of the white power group the New Saxons and much of the rhetoric that you post in here.

Looks like the SLPC was right about the American Legion.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-21-2015, 05:55 PM
Let me guess.............you are one of the 'exceptionally strong minded'?


I don't have to guess: you're not.

KA-POW!

Thanks for playing TJ, but Rusty wins that one.

We have some some lovely departing gifts for you.

Don Pardo, tell TJ about his consolation prize.




TJ will receive a box of Sax-a-roni.

Sax-a-roni! The white racist's treat.

Rusty Jones
12-21-2015, 06:06 PM
KA-POW!

Thanks for playing TJ, but Rusty wins that one.

We have some some lovely departing gifts for you.

Don Pardo, tell TJ about his consolation prize.

That fool loves to keep coming at me, and he's gonna get bitch-slapped every time.

Mjölnir
12-21-2015, 06:10 PM
let's stay on topic and curtail personal insults.

Rainmaker
12-21-2015, 06:16 PM
Looks like the SLPC was right about the American Legion.

ooh baseball teams named Saxons!

Very scary and probably even a 'Micro aggression'!

Time for SPLC's dual citizens donors (like billionaire Jewish pornographer Sheldon Adleson) to step up and lobby Congress to pull the American Legion's charter because it could hurt someone's feelings to have such an exclusive group!

Nomsayin?

MikeKerriii
12-21-2015, 09:28 PM
Well if you really want him to win then,You might wanna stop warning us 6 times a day how dangerous he is.

all this talk about 'fascism' is really scary to some people!

Hell @Absinthe Anecdote (http://forums.militarytimes.com/member.php?u=15055) is already pissing in his little panties every time he hears the word 'Saxon' as it is.

Even the few Trumps few that are not lunatics or bigots admire his hate, bigotry and lunacy, so I am helping him with his base. Who knew that that described such a HUGE chunk of the GOP?

garhkal
12-22-2015, 03:31 AM
How has she "attacked' Cristian conservatives?

What law has she broken? Be be specific

What law has she tried or even proposed to be established by decree?

Oppose a political opponent is fear mongering? Can you give a single example of her fear mongering?

I can back any of the items I listed with examples, can you do so for any of yours?


What do you call her whole Email fiasco. If not breaking the law?



Let us also not forget that the military churns out conservatives. Unless you're of exceptionally strong mind, even the most liberal people will end up conservative by the time they finish basic training.

Just like Hollywood and most Colleges churn out liberals, unless you are one of the lucky ones to go in conservative and remain it through out..

MikeKerriii
12-22-2015, 04:28 AM
What do you call her whole Email fiasco. If not breaking the law?

I would bet a large sum of s does your imagination think she broke? So far you have not justified one of your claims, Dimwitted RWNJ talking heads calling something a crime does not make it a crime.

You are getting into "Vince foster was murdered by the Clintons" levels of silliness here, Or the Birther silliness your Hero Trump lied about so loudly a few years ago..

Rusty Jones
12-22-2015, 10:38 AM
What do you call her whole Email fiasco. If not breaking the law?


The only people who care about that are people who weren't going to vote for her anyway. Bring it up if you want to, but the only people listening are the people who are going to bitch right along with you.



Just like Hollywood and most Colleges churn out liberals, unless you are one of the lucky ones to go in conservative and remain it through out..

What the fuck does that have to do with the military, or how the fuck does it contribute to the explanation of the American Legion being the way that it is?

Mjölnir
12-22-2015, 12:22 PM
I would bet a large sum of s does your imagination think she broke? So far you have not justified one of your claims, Dimwitted RWNJ talking heads calling something a crime does not make it a crime.

You are getting into "Vince foster was murdered by the Clintons" levels of silliness here, Or the Birther silliness your Hero Trump lied about so loudly a few years ago..

To be fair ... the Intelligence Community Inspector General (far from the Right Wing) concluded that some of the emails sent & received by Secretary Clinton on her private server were classified and marked as such prior to be transferred to the unclassified network.:

Director of National Intelligence Report: http://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/210-press-releases-2015/1232-statement-from-the-inspectors-general-of-the-intelligence-community-and-the-department-of-state-regarding-the-review-of-former-secretary-clinton-s-emails


The IC IG found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of 40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Departments; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.

This makes it sound like at least some of the emails were classified & properly marked as such prior to being sent to the private server, the markings were removed but the text/substance of the emails not edited to remove data and the emails (substance intact) then sent via unclassified systems.

From a standpoint of the law, the Justice Department office of Information and Privacy has said the four specific laws that she likely violated are:

The Federal Records Act: requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.

Freedom of Information Act: designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."

National Archives and Records Administration Act: NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."

Section 1924 of Title 18: has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents.

Now, whether or not a Grand Jury or Independent Prosecutor ever get this referred to them is another matter, but to dismiss the concern or discussion is far from Right Wing conspiracy.

==========

The Federal Records Act:

Clinton did not use an official government email account while serving as the country's top diplomat. Instead, she used a private email account and kept all of her emails on a private server in her home. The server has been wiped clean, according to the Republican-led Benghazi committee.

The State Department initially Hillary Clinton did not break any rules by relying solely on her personal email account. Federal law allows government officials to use personal email so long as relevant documents are preserved for history however, her personal email server was wiped clean and the data had to be forensically recovered.

FOIA:

Contrary to the letter of the FOIA and the spirit of FOIA, Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those. What is "unprecedented" is that Clinton's exclusive use of private email and her own Internet service provider in lieu of an official account "so that the records of her email account would reside solely within her personal control at home."

That means "she managed successfully to insulate her official emails, categorically, from the FOIA, both during her tenure at State and long after her departure from it — perhaps forever." He called that "a blatant circumvention of the FOIA by someone who unquestionably knows better." -- Dan Metcalfe, Justice Department's Office of Information and Privacy

The Justice Department weighed in, calling it "sheer speculation" that "Clinton withheld any work-related emails from those provided to the Department of State." What's more, Justice wrote, "FOIA creates no obligation for an agency to search for and produce records that it does not possess and control."

NARA:

The National Archives is where all government records eventually end up. There are several Archives rules and regulations that have been updated since Clinton left office. For example, it is now more explicit about guidance for use of personal email.

Still, the use of private email and, even further, a private email server certainly limits Archives' call for "ready retrieval of electronic records," records that are "readily found when needed" and are easily scrutinized by Congress.

Clinton allies argue that she is not the first secretary of state to use a private account. In fact, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said last month, "For some historical context, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account."

Section 1924 Of Title 18 — Classified Information

Refer back to the IC IG for this. The closest and very recent parallel case is that of Gen Petraeus who was convicted of mishandling classified information.

The crux of section 1924 is that the information doesn't specifically need to be marked as classified nor does the person mishandling the information need to know it is classified to violate the law.

If a layman receives an email that is not marked as classified on an unclassified system they would/should assume that the email isn't classified. An intel professional or someone who deals with this kind of stuff daily would immediately know that something was amiss. Mrs. Clinton is somewhere between the two (neither a layman but not an intel professional.) I do think she is smart enough to think that some of the data could have been sensitive. But, Mrs. Clinton is far from stupid as well.

Mjölnir
12-22-2015, 12:28 PM
The only people who care about that are people who weren't going to vote for her anyway. Bring it up if you want to, but the only people listening are the people who are going to bitch right along with you.

I disagree:

I am inclined to agree with her on many issues, but having worked in and around classified material for the better part of 25 years, am definitely bothered but the issue.

I have a friend from when I worked in the Senate who worked for Senator and Candidate Clinton who resigned from the campaign over this particular issue.

I think you are correct that the people raising the biggest huff about it are those who would never note for her. At the same time, there are a lot of political moderates or 'indifferents' who have looked at the issue on its facts and the law and at least think it deserves more attention to either allow for prosecution or exoneration ... one way or the other. But dismissing it absent any formal process looks shady.

giggawatt
12-22-2015, 12:39 PM
I would bet a large sum of s does your imagination think she broke? So far you have not justified one of your claims, Dimwitted RWNJ talking heads calling something a crime does not make it a crime.

You are getting into "Vince foster was murdered by the Clintons" levels of silliness here, Or the Birther silliness your Hero Trump lied about so loudly a few years ago..

Seriously man. Do you not proof read your posts? What does this even mean?

MikeKerriii
12-22-2015, 01:38 PM
To be fair ... the Intelligence Community Inspector General (far from the Right Wing) concluded that some of the emails sent & received by Secretary Clinton on her private server were classified and marked as such prior to be transferred to the unclassified network.:

Director of National Intelligence Report: http://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/210-press-releases-2015/1232-statement-from-the-inspectors-general-of-the-intelligence-community-and-the-department-of-state-regarding-the-review-of-former-secretary-clinton-s-emails



This makes it sound like at least some of the emails were classified & properly marked as such prior to being sent to the private server, the markings were removed but the text/substance of the emails not edited to remove data and the emails (substance intact) then sent via unclassified systems.

From a standpoint of the law, the Justice Department office of Information and Privacy has said the four specific laws that she likely violated are:

The Federal Records Act: requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.

Freedom of Information Act: designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."

National Archives and Records Administration Act: NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."

Section 1924 of Title 18: has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents.

Now, whether or not a Grand Jury or Independent Prosecutor ever get this referred to them is another matter, but to dismiss the concern or discussion is far from Right Wing conspiracy.

==========

The Federal Records Act:

Clinton did not use an official government email account while serving as the country's top diplomat. Instead, she used a private email account and kept all of her emails on a private server in her home. The server has been wiped clean, according to the Republican-led Benghazi committee.

The State Department initially Hillary Clinton did not break any rules by relying solely on her personal email account. Federal law allows government officials to use personal email so long as relevant documents are preserved for history however, her personal email server was wiped clean and the data had to be forensically recovered.

FOIA:

Contrary to the letter of the FOIA and the spirit of FOIA, Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those. What is "unprecedented" is that Clinton's exclusive use of private email and her own Internet service provider in lieu of an official account "so that the records of her email account would reside solely within her personal control at home."

That means "she managed successfully to insulate her official emails, categorically, from the FOIA, both during her tenure at State and long after her departure from it — perhaps forever." He called that "a blatant circumvention of the FOIA by someone who unquestionably knows better." -- Dan Metcalfe, Justice Department's Office of Information and Privacy

The Justice Department weighed in, calling it "sheer speculation" that "Clinton withheld any work-related emails from those provided to the Department of State." What's more, Justice wrote, "FOIA creates no obligation for an agency to search for and produce records that it does not possess and control."

NARA:

The National Archives is where all government records eventually end up. There are several Archives rules and regulations that have been updated since Clinton left office. For example, it is now more explicit about guidance for use of personal email.

Still, the use of private email and, even further, a private email server certainly limits Archives' call for "ready retrieval of electronic records," records that are "readily found when needed" and are easily scrutinized by Congress.

Clinton allies argue that she is not the first secretary of state to use a private account. In fact, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said last month, "For some historical context, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account."

Section 1924 Of Title 18 — Classified Information

Refer back to the IC IG for this. The closest and very recent parallel case is that of Gen Petraeus who was convicted of mishandling classified information.

The crux of section 1924 is that the information doesn't specifically need to be marked as classified nor does the person mishandling the information need to know it is classified to violate the law.

If a layman receives an email that is not marked as classified on an unclassified system they would/should assume that the email isn't classified. An intel professional or someone who deals with this kind of stuff daily would immediately know that something was amiss. Mrs. Clinton is somewhere between the two (neither a layman but not an intel professional.) I do think she is smart enough to think that some of the data could have been sensitive. But, Mrs. Clinton is far from stupid as well.

Unless she knew things were classified when she got them, or before she sent them no laws were broken. Tons of regulations but that is not a crime.
It is funny but if those messages were sent over the State Department primary mail server it would have been just as wrong, since that system is not secured for classified materials either, They use a separate system for classified info, just as DOD does

Absinthe Anecdote
12-22-2015, 01:50 PM
Unless she knew things were classified when she got them, or before she sent them no laws were broken. Tons of regulations but that is not a crime.

No, you are so very wrong.

What you are speaking to is criminal intent and that would be argued in the court. There are several chargeable crimes in that debacle.

Mjölnir
12-22-2015, 01:54 PM
Unless she knew things were classified when she got them, or before she sent them no laws were broken. Tons of regulations but that is not a crime.

Incorrect per section 1924. Knowing the data is or is not classified doesn't mitigate mishandling classified, it is then a minor felony. The same as not knowing that property is stolen but transferring the property is still a minor felony (usually not prosecuted ... but still the law.) Now, in reality, her knowledge of lack thereof is certainly a factor, but the way the law is written ... her not knowing doesn't make it not a crime.


It is funny but if those messages were sent over the State Department primary mail server it would have been just as wrong, since that system is not secured for classified materials either, They use a separate system for classified info, just as DOD does

Correct, and if you read the IG report, the information found on her private email server to be classified originated from classified networks. Someone, somewhere removed the classification markings transferred that data from a classified network to an unclassified network ... which is also a crime. Now, I don't think Secretary Clinton did the transfer herself ... it was a staffer. Who, directed or authorized the transfer? In DoD, the transfer of data from a classified network to an unclassified network is controlled by a Digital Transfer Authority (DTA). Where did the DoS policy break that allowed this to happen? The DoS seems to be not interested in reviewing that.

What is most important to me is that a cabinet Secretary had (apparently) such a little understanding of what is and is not sensitive & classified information. I don't think the establishment of a private email server was a method to get classified information to her (that was an unintended secondary effect) ... my personal thought is that it was a way to circumvent federal records laws.

TJMAC77SP
12-22-2015, 02:06 PM
That fool loves to keep coming at me, and he's gonna get bitch-slapped every time.

You are kidding me right?!?

Bitch slapped. You are a delusional fuck. Of course that is not news but at times the level of your stupidity is amazing.

Despite AA predictable retort your answer hardly dilutes your amazing arrogance in characterizing the vast majority of military members as being what amounts to brain washed while at the same time alluding to the ludicrous assertion that somehow your intelligence level has made you immune to such machinations.

This despite the fact that your posts have revealed the exact opposite.

AA, how about another mention of being 'duped' by a transgender? I realize you have been dying to expand your Saxon nonsense but let's attempt to hold on to some integrity huh?