U.S Election 2016

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Pierre

No problem here with peaceful intelligent protest.

You very really get it though.

Sadly there will always be a small number who infiltrate these protest's who are hell bent on violence and stirring it up and that is totally unacceptable to any normal rational person.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Mick

Ignored and rightly so. Several reasons. Petitioning against a National Democratic decision is stupid.

How many of those who signed the Petition actually got off their arses and went out to vote?

Finally numbers: 4 Million does not beat the 17,4 Million who voted to leave the EU.

But then again Mr K, I do not expect you to respect any democratic decision, given that you show very little respect for anything else.

Well you see it's easy to click on a button, far easier than actually doing something meaningful. Makes you feel good and eases that terrible internal outrage in a split second before you move on to the next cause. We live in the age of social media driven faux outrage.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Pierre

And up until that point I thought you weren't an idiot.

That was almost a compliment, I think

Here's some reading for you:

Countries where Trump does business are not hit by new travel restrictions

Trump’s Immigration Ban Excludes Countries With Business Ties

Countries Listed On Trump's Refugee Ban Don't Include Those He Has Business With

Originally Posted by ianch99

That was almost a compliment, I think

Here's some reading for you:

Countries where Trump does business are not hit by new travel restrictions

Trump’s Immigration Ban Excludes Countries With Business Ties

Countries Listed On Trump's Refugee Ban Don't Include Those He Has Business With

All irrelevant reading unless you have an agenda, 7 Countries, listed as those at risk previously by Obama Administration (A point you keep conveniently ignoring, no surprise there.)

[pip08456]

Also worth noting is there are muslim countries that Trump doesn't have business ties with also off the list.

That wouldn't be newsworthy though would it?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

All irrelevant reading unless you have an agenda, 7 Countries, listed as those at risk previously by Obama Administration (A point you keep conveniently ignoring, no surprise there Mr. Ignorant.)

That's not very nice.

Originally Posted by Osem

Demanding Trump's removal whilst turning a blind eye to China's civil rights and other abuses (which are far worse than anything he's done) is frankly pathetic.

Are there people who are condemning Trump that approve of what China is doing? No one is calling for a boycott of American goods (so far) so I don't see the contradiction in criticizing Trump and not boycotting goods made in China.

Besides this gets a bit whataboutery if the respond to complaints about Trump are to say 'well what about China'?

[Pierre]

Can't excuse bad behaviour with bad behaviour.

Rightly or wrongly Trump is held to a higher standard than the Chinese. He is the leader of the free world and they are anything but free.

But china has no problem in destroying the west's industry, which is on it's knees anyway, so i have to commend Trump for at least fighting back, it's more than any of our tory or labour governments have done.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Mick

All irrelevant reading unless you have an agenda, 7 Countries, listed as those at risk previously by Obama Administration (A point you keep conveniently ignoring, no surprise there Mr. Ignorant.)

No need to lower the tone Michael.

Originally Posted by Mr K

No need to lower the tone Michael.

This coming from you ?

Give me a break.

(But for what it's worth I will compromise, if it's causing so much upset, I have edited my post accordingly.)

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

That's not very nice.

That's Mick being nice You should see some of his other posts ..

Originally Posted by ianch99

That's Mick being nice You should see some of his other posts ..

Originally Posted by Osem

Maybe they should just choose to make their views felt by supporting less unsavoury regimes with their money and buy their tech etc. elsewhere? Ooohh but that's too painful a protest to make lol Far easier to go on a march then go to Starbucks for a latte and free use of their wi-fi in order to click on a petition.

They remind me of the Starbucks warriors whose huge outrage at tax avoidance amounted to buying their coffee elsewhere for about a week. They sure do talk lots of talk but rarely seem to back it up with anything meaningful and put their money where their mouth is.

Demanding Trump's removal whilst turning a blind eye to China's civil rights and other abuses (which are far worse than anything he's done) is frankly pathetic.

I still refuse to use Starbucks..Don't be so dismissive of those who do try to pay our pennies to organisations that play fair and not to those who don't.

---------- Post added at 14:12 ---------- Previous post was at 14:10 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

Are there people who are condemning Trump that approve of what China is doing? No one is calling for a boycott of American goods (so far) so I don't see the contradiction in criticizing Trump and not boycotting goods made in China.

Besides this gets a bit whataboutery if the respond to complaints about Trump are to say 'well what about China'?

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Also worth noting is there are muslim countries that Trump doesn't have business ties with also off the list.

That wouldn't be newsworthy though would it?

Now this *is* newsworthy:

https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...rorism/514361/

But after sifting through databases, media reports, court documents, and other sources, Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration expert at the libertarian Cato Institute, has arrived at a striking finding: Nationals of the seven countries singled out by Trump have killed zero people in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1975 and 2015.

Zero.

Six Iranians, six Sudanese, two Somalis, two Iraqis, and one Yemeni have been convicted of attempting or executing terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during that time period, according to Nowrasteh’s research. (Nowrasteh focused on plots against the U.S. homeland, which presumably Trump cares most about, rather than other terrorism-related offenses, like supporting a foreign terrorist group or trying to join a jihadist organization overseas.) Zero Libyans and zero Syrians have been convicted of doing the same. “Foreign-born terrorism is a hazard,” Nowrasteh argues, “but it is manageable given the huge economic benefits of immigration and the small costs of terrorism.”

As for refugees, Nowrasteh writes, Trump’s action “is a response to a phantom menace.” Over the last four decades, 20 out of 3.25 million refugees welcomed to the United States have been convicted of attempting or committing terrorism on U.S. soil, and only three Americans have been killed in attacks committed by refugees—all by Cuban refugees in the 1970s.

Zero Americans have been killed by Syrian refugees in a terrorist attack in the United States.

[Scary]

i got bored at work and created some trump memes