In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
With all the things going on both in the US and around the world, I can't see any reason to focus on something as unimportant as this.
I would think it more useful to research Khan's myriad ties and relationships with Islamic Extremists and Organizations.
That anyone would instead focus on a tweet from Trump seems a waste of time.
I agree with your first statement, Dads3040. I would also would suggest our President would have been better served by insisting that the vetting process review and implementation were on track within his stated 90 - 120 days rather than wasting his time tweeting and fighting the suspension of his travel ban through the courts.
Khan's past is no more important in this little tit-for-tat than is Trump's. In this instance, Trump behaved like a child. I had hoped for better by this time.
Your focus on improving the vetting process would be more operative, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the authority to implement that enhanced process emanates from the same 8 US 1182 statutes that the 9th Circus and other courts say Trump cannot use because he is a poop. If you care to opine that any effort by Trump to restrict immigration and travel by process rather than moratorium would garner a different reception from the left and the courts, you are free to do so. I am not near that hopeful. Since the opinion from the 9th managed to wander aimlessly in Leftist Legal Lala Land without ever even mentioning 8 US 1182, I have a sneaking suspicion that absent a favorable ruling from the SCOTUS, or Congress growing a spine, any new process will meet the same fate as the moratorium. And most in the country will be as oblivious to the impact of that as they have to much of what has gone on.
Also complicating any effort to revise the vetting process is a little known and less discussed problem. After Hillary lost, Obama and his minions spent months changing positions that had been political appointees subject to immediate pink slips, to civil service status. Trump is surrounded by hostile staff, management, and all the opposition and mayhem they can create. Add in the slow walkign of his appointees that has been going on, and a serious problem related to the 'peaceful tansition of power' lurks about. A perfect illustration is 'Acting' Ambassador to the UK we heard praising Sadiq Khan. Lukens was appointed by CJ 3 days before his term ended. And Trump's appointee to be an ambassador is still languishing, waiting for the Senate to get around to it. If they can't manage to deal with a 'Who gives a F' position like ambassador to the UK, one wonders what they are doing with more important positions.
It is little discussed, because people are willing to be distracted from what the left hand is doing by a press that tells them the right hand must be watched. Especially when the right hand does something as earth-shatteringly terrible as tweet something objectionable. I watch it here in GB constantly. In the rest of the country it is even worse.
Finally, if you think the political leanings and affiliations of the mayor of one of the world's major cities and what that means to the overall extent of the problem we face aren't relevant because they are somehow in the 'past', I will leave you to your opinion. Anything more I might say wouldn't likely be helpful.
Gotta get it right in the courts now. Precedent is important.
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
I will take Trump over a muslim mayor any day. Trump has done more for the 2nd amendment already than anyone since I was born. If you can't figure him out, don't try. I still stand by Trump.
I haven't been around in a while, never the less it does not surprise me to see Trump bashers defend a scumbag Muslim terrorist supporter expert in takiyya, it means to lie and deceive.
PresidentTrump is the best thing that happened to this country in a very long time, it sounds some of you are missing Barry Satoro he is totally in line with the mayor of London.
We have to fight so we can run away.
Capt. Jack Sparrow.
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
With all the things going on both in the US and around the world, I can't see any reason to focus on something as unimportant as this.
I would think it more useful to research Khan's myriad ties and relationships with Islamic Extremists and Organizations.
That anyone would instead focus on a tweet from Trump seems a waste of time.
I agree with your first statement, Dads3040. I would also would suggest our President would have been better served by insisting that the vetting process review and implementation were on track within his stated 90 - 120 days rather than wasting his time tweeting and fighting the suspension of his travel ban through the courts.
Khan's past is no more important in this little tit-for-tat than is Trump's. In this instance, Trump behaved like a child. I had hoped for better by this time.
Your focus on improving the vetting process would be more operative, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the authority to implement that enhanced process emanates from the same 8 US 1182 statutes that the 9th Circus and other courts say Trump cannot use because he is a poop. If you care to opine that any effort by Trump to restrict immigration and travel by process rather than moratorium would garner a different reception from the left and the courts, you are free to do so. I am not near that hopeful. Since the opinion from the 9th managed to wander aimlessly in Leftist Legal Lala Land without ever even mentioning 8 US 1182, I have a sneaking suspicion that absent a favorable ruling from the SCOTUS, or Congress growing a spine, any new process will meet the same fate as the moratorium. And most in the country will be as oblivious to the impact of that as they have to much of what has gone on.
Also complicating any effort to revise the vetting process is a little known and less discussed problem. After Hillary lost, Obama and his minions spent months changing positions that had been political appointees subject to immediate pink slips, to civil service status. Trump is surrounded by hostile staff, management, and all the opposition and mayhem they can create. Add in the slow walkign of his appointees that has been going on, and a serious problem related to the 'peaceful tansition of power' lurks about. A perfect illustration is 'Acting' Ambassador to the UK we heard praising Sadiq Khan. Lukens was appointed by CJ 3 days before his term ended. And Trump's appointee to be an ambassador is still languishing, waiting for the Senate to get around to it. If they can't manage to deal with a 'Who gives a F' position like ambassador to the UK, one wonders what they are doing with more important positions.
It is little discussed, because people are willing to be distracted from what the left hand is doing by a press that tells them the right hand must be watched. Especially when the right hand does something as earth-shatteringly terrible as tweet something objectionable. I watch it here in GB constantly. In the rest of the country it is even worse.
Finally, if you think the political leanings and affiliations of the mayor of one of the world's major cities and what that means to the overall extent of the problem we face aren't relevant because they are somehow in the 'past', I will leave you to your opinion. Anything more I might say wouldn't likely be helpful.
You know as well as I do that the courts have ruled based upon (what I believe to be) the false premise that Trump's campaign rhetoric should be taken into account when reviewing the ban in that the rhetoric suggests this is a ban upon a religion and not a region. Their decisions have nothing to do with any statute, merely perception of the ban.
Likewise, their rulings have nothing to do with any future vetting process. The argument could be made that the decisions suggest the vetting would have to be universal and not targeted to any specific country, but given the citizenship of most of the recent terrorist attackers, we are at that point anyway. The argument that you have to have the ban in place before you can begin the review and implementation of enhanced vetting is a dodge, and frankly I am surprised that you have fallen into that trap.
Also, please don't suggest that I have said anything in general about the positions and leaning of the Mayor of London. I have confined my comments to this specific incident where he was right and our President was wrong and behaved like a child. I have little vested in what the mayor of London has said or will say. In general, he seems to be a man that has allegiances or sympathies that may be at odds with what is needed to put down what he calls a distorted view of islam, but I was addressing Trump's actions, not his.
I have a vested interest and significant concern about what my President is saying and will say. As noted previously, I still hope that he grows the hell up, but this hope is fading due to his words, not any spin from the left. After all, he is creating the distractions they are exploiting.
Edit:
All that said, Mayor Khan has now come out against Trump's planned but not yet scheduled State visit to England as was discussed with PM May last month.
Now he is behaving like a child.
I certainly haven't fallen into any trap, Don. Nowhere did I say anything about a ban being necessary before the enhanced vetting can be implemented. I was very clear in stating that the authority to implement those procedures or processes come from the same statutes that the courts have said Trump can't use. If you think that any enhanced vetting will not face the same legal challenges as the moratorium, you will have to hold that opinion alone.
If Trump is precluded from using 8 US 1182 for a moratorium because of statements he made on the campaign trail, I am not sure what logical construct could be assembled that the same courts wouldn't likewise say his new vetting process isn't allowable because...Trump be Poopy. Hell, it worked once.
As for Khan, given his previous statements about terrorism being 'part and parcel of living in big cities', his statement about nothing to be alarmed about is at best poorly phrased and even more poorly timed.
quote:?My message to Londoners and visitors to our great city is to be calm and vigilant today," Mr Khan said. "You will see an increased police presence today, including armed officers and uniformed officers.
"There is no reason to be alarmed by this. We are the safest global city in the world. You saw last night as a consequence of our planning, our preparation, the rehearsals that take place, the swift response from the emergency services tackling the terrorists and also helping the injured.?
That is "perfectly logical"? By what measure? On what planet?
What the people of London, and the world saw the night before was another instance of terrorists killing people in London a couple months after the last time they did it. And after the scum had killed 7 people and injured 40-some others, the REACTION was stellar. Oh Goody! I bet that makes the dead folks and their families feel much better. By Godfrey we may have stiffs laying all over the streets, but due to great foresight and planning we had body bags ready, and the street cleaners were washing the streets before the sidewalks got stained too bad.
It certainly appears Khan is holding the police back from doing what they could about those they know about, because to do so would upset his fellow goat humpers. How else do you explain that within hours of each of these attacks, the police are able to round up 10 or 12 co-conspirators? There certainly hadn't been enough time passed to investigate anything. Which leads to one inescapable conclusion: They knew who these people were, but did nothing until they killed people? Great. Just F'n great.
1st Tweet 6/3 4:17 PM
quote:We need to be smart, vigilant and tough. We need the courts to give us back our rights. We need the Travel Ban as an extra level of safety!
2nd Tweet 6/3 4:24 PM
quote:Whatever the United States can do to help out in London and the U. K., we will be there - WE ARE WITH YOU. GOD BLESS!
3rd Tweet 6/4 4:19 AM
quote:We must stop being politically correct and get down to the business of security for our people. If we don't get smart it will only get worse
4th Tweet 6/4 4:31 AM
quote:At least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and Mayor of London says there is "no reason to be alarmed!"
The one you and the media are wound up about is the last one in that series. I know why it is their focus. They do not want the others to be seen or talked about, because they desire the world to be distracted from the reality the others showcase.
Khan's previous statement was that being prepared for terrorist attacks was part a parcel of being a great global city, not that the attacks themselves were part and parcel. A significant difference.
And yes, suggesting that the people of London not be alarmed by an increased armed police presence is a perfectly logical statement.
You make a good point regarding the rapidity of find co-conspirators, both in Manchester and in London. It makes sense only in that two of the three were known to law enforcement prior to the attack, and, one would think, the previous investigations of these two included names of people who were immediately contacted.
You also bring up another, and perhaps the most important question; that being how far should we/they go prior to a crime being committed? At what point is speech by a citizen sufficient to warrant incarceration? GB currently had more than 3,000 people on a watch list as being dangerous with 20,000 or so more on a lessor list, and 2 of the 3 were on one of these lists. The third was completely unknown to law enforcement. One can make the argument that it would have been good to lock the two known persons away, but on what charge? 'Probably going to commit Jihad' is obviously not sufficient.
Regarding Trump's time wasted on the travel ban vs. vetting: Fame seeking state Attorneys General will no doubt take any number of parts of an enhanced betting process before what they believe to be a sympathetic court. They will do so whether the travel ban is upheld or tossed aside by SCOTUS. As you point out, the stays are based not upon statute but on emotion. I suppose SCOTUS could go out of its way and declare that the Travel Ban is legal and Constitutional, or, as is more likely, they will decide that the stay lacks merit and the stay will be reversed. Not that it matters, as the temporary suspension of the issuance of a VISA based upon region is an entirely different matter than the criteria of entry for an individual.
Regarding the tweets:
No 1. is a throw away and makes little sense. We need the courts to give us back our rights? Who are 'us'? What rights? The President has the power to restrict immigration, it is not a right. Maybe he is talking about something else. Not a Presidential statement.
No. 2 is Presidential, and is what every President has said and should say since these types of things have been occurring.
No. 3 is Presidential enough I guess, and I agree that we should get down to business. An improved form of vetting immigrants and visitors would be a good start.
No. 4 is stupid, wrong and childish.
Obviously people focus on the things he does that are beneath the office. We should also focus on things he does that reflect positively upon the office. He did that with Gorsuch and with some of his Regulatory rollbacks and deserves credit.
It is not too much to ask that he stop stepping on his crank, however, because anyone who actually cares about this country fells it when he does.
Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
quote:Originally posted by CaptFun
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
quote:Originally posted by 1911a1-fan
sure does bring out the trump haters, msn-cnn took trumps words and twisted them against him claiming he took it out of text
drink the kool-aid all you want, trump was right there is plenty to worry about
What words did they twist ?
You and Serf are really starting to grate on my nerves (again). I've told you before. Stay in politics. Last warning.
You've never told me to stay in politics.
But if it is your desire that I not post here, I am not about to try to convince you otherwise.
As long as it is your forum, you get to make the rules.
Best of luck in your future endeavors!
Luke 12:48
PHASE DETAILS FOR - TUESDAY, JUNE 6, 2017
Phase: Waxing Gibbous
Illumination: 92%
Moon Age: 12.03 days
Moon Angle: 0.49
Moon Distance: 402,506.84 km
Sun Angle: 0.53
Sun Distance: 151,825,628.71 km
"What we've got here is failure to communicate" Hey Barz dude you should go and feel the Bern in Venezuela
We have to fight so we can run away.
Capt. Jack Sparrow.
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
Khan's previous statement was that being prepared for terrorist attacks was part a parcel of being a great global city, not that the attacks themselves were part and parcel. A significant difference.
And yes, suggesting that the people of London not be alarmed by an increased armed police presence is a perfectly logical statement.
You make a good point regarding the rapidity of find co-conspirators, both in Manchester and in London. It makes sense only in that two of the three were known to law enforcement prior to the attack, and, one would think, the previous investigations of these two included names of people who were immediately contacted.
You also bring up another, and perhaps the most important question; that being how far should we/they go prior to a crime being committed? At what point is speech by a citizen sufficient to warrant incarceration? GB currently had more than 3,000 people on a watch list as being dangerous with 20,000 or so more on a lessor list, and 2 of the 3 were on one of these lists. The third was completely unknown to law enforcement. One can make the argument that it would have been good to lock the two known persons away, but on what charge? 'Probably going to commit Jihad' is obviously not sufficient.
Regarding Trump's time wasted on the travel ban vs. vetting: Fame seeking state Attorneys General will no doubt take any number of parts of an enhanced betting process before what they believe to be a sympathetic court. They will do so whether the travel ban is upheld or tossed aside by SCOTUS. As you point out, the stays are based not upon statute but on emotion. I suppose SCOTUS could go out of its way and declare that the Travel Ban is legal and Constitutional, or, as is more likely, they will decide that the stay lacks merit and the stay will be reversed. Not that it matters, as the temporary suspension of the issuance of a VISA based upon region is an entirely different matter than the criteria of entry for an individual.
Regarding the tweets:
No 1. is a throw away and makes little sense. We need the courts to give us back our rights? Who are 'us'? What rights? The President has the power to restrict immigration, it is not a right. Maybe he is talking about something else. Not a Presidential statement.
No. 2 is Presidential, and is what every President has said and should say since these types of things have been occurring.
No. 3 is Presidential enough I guess, and I agree that we should get down to business. An improved form of vetting immigrants and visitors would be a good start.
No. 4 is stupid, wrong and childish.
Obviously people focus on the things he does that are beneath the office. We should also focus on things he does that reflect positively upon the office. He did that with Gorsuch and with some of his Regulatory rollbacks and deserves credit.
It is not too much to ask that he stop stepping on his crank, however, because anyone who actually cares about this country fells it when he does.
What was that Beatles song? Oh yea, "Twist and Shout!"
There is no such thing as Liberal Men, only Liberal Women with Penises.'
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
We have to fight so we can run away.
Capt. Jack Sparrow.
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
If a person is too stupid to understand the subtleties of a post, they may want to refrain from false associations and throwing around words such as 'scumbags'.
Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.
The Crusades ended in 1291 and hundreds of years later there are opinions why the crusades were fought and who won. However it was a Christian / Muslim war and the Muslims won, depending on your perspective.
Christianity comprises various religious groups and churches but has one big difference with Muslim religions. Christians don't murder each other over religion, (well there was Ireland) Muslims do. ie: ISIS first terrorist attack in IRAN, yep, Shiite vrs Sunni. No place is totally one or the other but definitely geographic majority's.
ISIS=Sunni
IRAN=Shiite
Saudi Arabia=Sunni
Qatar=Sunni
Sunni = 80%
Shiite+ 20%
According to a study in 2015, Islam has 1.8 billion adherents, making up about 24% of the world population. Most Muslims are either of two denominations: Sunni (80-90%, roughly 1.5 billion people) or Shia (10?20%, roughly 170-340 million people).
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
If a person is too stupid to understand the subtleties of a post, they may want to refrain from false associations and throwing around words such as 'scumbags'.
bleen you liberal jerk !!
We have to fight so we can run away.
Capt. Jack Sparrow.
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
If a person is too stupid to understand the subtleties of a post, they may want to refrain from false associations and throwing around words such as 'scumbags'.
bleen you liberal jerk !!
Cute.
You misunderstand a post, state basically what I posted and I'm a liberal jerk.
Does this type of deep thought serve you well in real life?
Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
If a person is too stupid to understand the subtleties of a post, they may want to refrain from false associations and throwing around words such as 'scumbags'.
bleen you liberal jerk !!
Have you had this reading deficit all your life?
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
Comments
The UK needs another Winston Churchill.
or 3.5 million less muslims
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
With all the things going on both in the US and around the world, I can't see any reason to focus on something as unimportant as this.
I would think it more useful to research Khan's myriad ties and relationships with Islamic Extremists and Organizations.
That anyone would instead focus on a tweet from Trump seems a waste of time.
I agree with your first statement, Dads3040. I would also would suggest our President would have been better served by insisting that the vetting process review and implementation were on track within his stated 90 - 120 days rather than wasting his time tweeting and fighting the suspension of his travel ban through the courts.
Khan's past is no more important in this little tit-for-tat than is Trump's. In this instance, Trump behaved like a child. I had hoped for better by this time.
Your focus on improving the vetting process would be more operative, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the authority to implement that enhanced process emanates from the same 8 US 1182 statutes that the 9th Circus and other courts say Trump cannot use because he is a poop. If you care to opine that any effort by Trump to restrict immigration and travel by process rather than moratorium would garner a different reception from the left and the courts, you are free to do so. I am not near that hopeful. Since the opinion from the 9th managed to wander aimlessly in Leftist Legal Lala Land without ever even mentioning 8 US 1182, I have a sneaking suspicion that absent a favorable ruling from the SCOTUS, or Congress growing a spine, any new process will meet the same fate as the moratorium. And most in the country will be as oblivious to the impact of that as they have to much of what has gone on.
Also complicating any effort to revise the vetting process is a little known and less discussed problem. After Hillary lost, Obama and his minions spent months changing positions that had been political appointees subject to immediate pink slips, to civil service status. Trump is surrounded by hostile staff, management, and all the opposition and mayhem they can create. Add in the slow walkign of his appointees that has been going on, and a serious problem related to the 'peaceful tansition of power' lurks about. A perfect illustration is 'Acting' Ambassador to the UK we heard praising Sadiq Khan. Lukens was appointed by CJ 3 days before his term ended. And Trump's appointee to be an ambassador is still languishing, waiting for the Senate to get around to it. If they can't manage to deal with a 'Who gives a F' position like ambassador to the UK, one wonders what they are doing with more important positions.
It is little discussed, because people are willing to be distracted from what the left hand is doing by a press that tells them the right hand must be watched. Especially when the right hand does something as earth-shatteringly terrible as tweet something objectionable. I watch it here in GB constantly. In the rest of the country it is even worse.
Finally, if you think the political leanings and affiliations of the mayor of one of the world's major cities and what that means to the overall extent of the problem we face aren't relevant because they are somehow in the 'past', I will leave you to your opinion. Anything more I might say wouldn't likely be helpful.
Gotta get it right in the courts now. Precedent is important.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
PresidentTrump is the best thing that happened to this country in a very long time, it sounds some of you are missing Barry Satoro he is totally in line with the mayor of London.
Capt. Jack Sparrow.
quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
With all the things going on both in the US and around the world, I can't see any reason to focus on something as unimportant as this.
I would think it more useful to research Khan's myriad ties and relationships with Islamic Extremists and Organizations.
That anyone would instead focus on a tweet from Trump seems a waste of time.
I agree with your first statement, Dads3040. I would also would suggest our President would have been better served by insisting that the vetting process review and implementation were on track within his stated 90 - 120 days rather than wasting his time tweeting and fighting the suspension of his travel ban through the courts.
Khan's past is no more important in this little tit-for-tat than is Trump's. In this instance, Trump behaved like a child. I had hoped for better by this time.
Your focus on improving the vetting process would be more operative, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the authority to implement that enhanced process emanates from the same 8 US 1182 statutes that the 9th Circus and other courts say Trump cannot use because he is a poop. If you care to opine that any effort by Trump to restrict immigration and travel by process rather than moratorium would garner a different reception from the left and the courts, you are free to do so. I am not near that hopeful. Since the opinion from the 9th managed to wander aimlessly in Leftist Legal Lala Land without ever even mentioning 8 US 1182, I have a sneaking suspicion that absent a favorable ruling from the SCOTUS, or Congress growing a spine, any new process will meet the same fate as the moratorium. And most in the country will be as oblivious to the impact of that as they have to much of what has gone on.
Also complicating any effort to revise the vetting process is a little known and less discussed problem. After Hillary lost, Obama and his minions spent months changing positions that had been political appointees subject to immediate pink slips, to civil service status. Trump is surrounded by hostile staff, management, and all the opposition and mayhem they can create. Add in the slow walkign of his appointees that has been going on, and a serious problem related to the 'peaceful tansition of power' lurks about. A perfect illustration is 'Acting' Ambassador to the UK we heard praising Sadiq Khan. Lukens was appointed by CJ 3 days before his term ended. And Trump's appointee to be an ambassador is still languishing, waiting for the Senate to get around to it. If they can't manage to deal with a 'Who gives a F' position like ambassador to the UK, one wonders what they are doing with more important positions.
It is little discussed, because people are willing to be distracted from what the left hand is doing by a press that tells them the right hand must be watched. Especially when the right hand does something as earth-shatteringly terrible as tweet something objectionable. I watch it here in GB constantly. In the rest of the country it is even worse.
Finally, if you think the political leanings and affiliations of the mayor of one of the world's major cities and what that means to the overall extent of the problem we face aren't relevant because they are somehow in the 'past', I will leave you to your opinion. Anything more I might say wouldn't likely be helpful.
You know as well as I do that the courts have ruled based upon (what I believe to be) the false premise that Trump's campaign rhetoric should be taken into account when reviewing the ban in that the rhetoric suggests this is a ban upon a religion and not a region. Their decisions have nothing to do with any statute, merely perception of the ban.
Likewise, their rulings have nothing to do with any future vetting process. The argument could be made that the decisions suggest the vetting would have to be universal and not targeted to any specific country, but given the citizenship of most of the recent terrorist attackers, we are at that point anyway. The argument that you have to have the ban in place before you can begin the review and implementation of enhanced vetting is a dodge, and frankly I am surprised that you have fallen into that trap.
Also, please don't suggest that I have said anything in general about the positions and leaning of the Mayor of London. I have confined my comments to this specific incident where he was right and our President was wrong and behaved like a child. I have little vested in what the mayor of London has said or will say. In general, he seems to be a man that has allegiances or sympathies that may be at odds with what is needed to put down what he calls a distorted view of islam, but I was addressing Trump's actions, not his.
I have a vested interest and significant concern about what my President is saying and will say. As noted previously, I still hope that he grows the hell up, but this hope is fading due to his words, not any spin from the left. After all, he is creating the distractions they are exploiting.
Edit:
All that said, Mayor Khan has now come out against Trump's planned but not yet scheduled State visit to England as was discussed with PM May last month.
Now he is behaving like a child.
I certainly haven't fallen into any trap, Don. Nowhere did I say anything about a ban being necessary before the enhanced vetting can be implemented. I was very clear in stating that the authority to implement those procedures or processes come from the same statutes that the courts have said Trump can't use. If you think that any enhanced vetting will not face the same legal challenges as the moratorium, you will have to hold that opinion alone.
If Trump is precluded from using 8 US 1182 for a moratorium because of statements he made on the campaign trail, I am not sure what logical construct could be assembled that the same courts wouldn't likewise say his new vetting process isn't allowable because...Trump be Poopy. Hell, it worked once.
As for Khan, given his previous statements about terrorism being 'part and parcel of living in big cities', his statement about nothing to be alarmed about is at best poorly phrased and even more poorly timed.
quote:?My message to Londoners and visitors to our great city is to be calm and vigilant today," Mr Khan said. "You will see an increased police presence today, including armed officers and uniformed officers.
"There is no reason to be alarmed by this. We are the safest global city in the world. You saw last night as a consequence of our planning, our preparation, the rehearsals that take place, the swift response from the emergency services tackling the terrorists and also helping the injured.?
That is "perfectly logical"? By what measure? On what planet?
What the people of London, and the world saw the night before was another instance of terrorists killing people in London a couple months after the last time they did it. And after the scum had killed 7 people and injured 40-some others, the REACTION was stellar. Oh Goody! I bet that makes the dead folks and their families feel much better. By Godfrey we may have stiffs laying all over the streets, but due to great foresight and planning we had body bags ready, and the street cleaners were washing the streets before the sidewalks got stained too bad.
It certainly appears Khan is holding the police back from doing what they could about those they know about, because to do so would upset his fellow goat humpers. How else do you explain that within hours of each of these attacks, the police are able to round up 10 or 12 co-conspirators? There certainly hadn't been enough time passed to investigate anything. Which leads to one inescapable conclusion: They knew who these people were, but did nothing until they killed people? Great. Just F'n great.
1st Tweet 6/3 4:17 PM
quote:We need to be smart, vigilant and tough. We need the courts to give us back our rights. We need the Travel Ban as an extra level of safety!
2nd Tweet 6/3 4:24 PM
quote:Whatever the United States can do to help out in London and the U. K., we will be there - WE ARE WITH YOU. GOD BLESS!
3rd Tweet 6/4 4:19 AM
quote:We must stop being politically correct and get down to the business of security for our people. If we don't get smart it will only get worse
4th Tweet 6/4 4:31 AM
quote:At least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and Mayor of London says there is "no reason to be alarmed!"
The one you and the media are wound up about is the last one in that series. I know why it is their focus. They do not want the others to be seen or talked about, because they desire the world to be distracted from the reality the others showcase.
And yes, suggesting that the people of London not be alarmed by an increased armed police presence is a perfectly logical statement.
You make a good point regarding the rapidity of find co-conspirators, both in Manchester and in London. It makes sense only in that two of the three were known to law enforcement prior to the attack, and, one would think, the previous investigations of these two included names of people who were immediately contacted.
You also bring up another, and perhaps the most important question; that being how far should we/they go prior to a crime being committed? At what point is speech by a citizen sufficient to warrant incarceration? GB currently had more than 3,000 people on a watch list as being dangerous with 20,000 or so more on a lessor list, and 2 of the 3 were on one of these lists. The third was completely unknown to law enforcement. One can make the argument that it would have been good to lock the two known persons away, but on what charge? 'Probably going to commit Jihad' is obviously not sufficient.
Regarding Trump's time wasted on the travel ban vs. vetting: Fame seeking state Attorneys General will no doubt take any number of parts of an enhanced betting process before what they believe to be a sympathetic court. They will do so whether the travel ban is upheld or tossed aside by SCOTUS. As you point out, the stays are based not upon statute but on emotion. I suppose SCOTUS could go out of its way and declare that the Travel Ban is legal and Constitutional, or, as is more likely, they will decide that the stay lacks merit and the stay will be reversed. Not that it matters, as the temporary suspension of the issuance of a VISA based upon region is an entirely different matter than the criteria of entry for an individual.
Regarding the tweets:
No 1. is a throw away and makes little sense. We need the courts to give us back our rights? Who are 'us'? What rights? The President has the power to restrict immigration, it is not a right. Maybe he is talking about something else. Not a Presidential statement.
No. 2 is Presidential, and is what every President has said and should say since these types of things have been occurring.
No. 3 is Presidential enough I guess, and I agree that we should get down to business. An improved form of vetting immigrants and visitors would be a good start.
No. 4 is stupid, wrong and childish.
Obviously people focus on the things he does that are beneath the office. We should also focus on things he does that reflect positively upon the office. He did that with Gorsuch and with some of his Regulatory rollbacks and deserves credit.
It is not too much to ask that he stop stepping on his crank, however, because anyone who actually cares about this country fells it when he does.
Brad Steele
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
Brad Steele
quote:Originally posted by CaptFun
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
quote:Originally posted by 1911a1-fan
sure does bring out the trump haters, msn-cnn took trumps words and twisted them against him claiming he took it out of text
drink the kool-aid all you want, trump was right there is plenty to worry about
What words did they twist ?
You and Serf are really starting to grate on my nerves (again). I've told you before. Stay in politics. Last warning.
You've never told me to stay in politics.
But if it is your desire that I not post here, I am not about to try to convince you otherwise.
As long as it is your forum, you get to make the rules.
Best of luck in your future endeavors!
Luke 12:48
PHASE DETAILS FOR - TUESDAY, JUNE 6, 2017
Phase: Waxing Gibbous
Illumination: 92%
Moon Age: 12.03 days
Moon Angle: 0.49
Moon Distance: 402,506.84 km
Sun Angle: 0.53
Sun Distance: 151,825,628.71 km
"What we've got here is failure to communicate" Hey Barz dude you should go and feel the Bern in Venezuela
Capt. Jack Sparrow.
Khan's previous statement was that being prepared for terrorist attacks was part a parcel of being a great global city, not that the attacks themselves were part and parcel. A significant difference.
And yes, suggesting that the people of London not be alarmed by an increased armed police presence is a perfectly logical statement.
You make a good point regarding the rapidity of find co-conspirators, both in Manchester and in London. It makes sense only in that two of the three were known to law enforcement prior to the attack, and, one would think, the previous investigations of these two included names of people who were immediately contacted.
You also bring up another, and perhaps the most important question; that being how far should we/they go prior to a crime being committed? At what point is speech by a citizen sufficient to warrant incarceration? GB currently had more than 3,000 people on a watch list as being dangerous with 20,000 or so more on a lessor list, and 2 of the 3 were on one of these lists. The third was completely unknown to law enforcement. One can make the argument that it would have been good to lock the two known persons away, but on what charge? 'Probably going to commit Jihad' is obviously not sufficient.
Regarding Trump's time wasted on the travel ban vs. vetting: Fame seeking state Attorneys General will no doubt take any number of parts of an enhanced betting process before what they believe to be a sympathetic court. They will do so whether the travel ban is upheld or tossed aside by SCOTUS. As you point out, the stays are based not upon statute but on emotion. I suppose SCOTUS could go out of its way and declare that the Travel Ban is legal and Constitutional, or, as is more likely, they will decide that the stay lacks merit and the stay will be reversed. Not that it matters, as the temporary suspension of the issuance of a VISA based upon region is an entirely different matter than the criteria of entry for an individual.
Regarding the tweets:
No 1. is a throw away and makes little sense. We need the courts to give us back our rights? Who are 'us'? What rights? The President has the power to restrict immigration, it is not a right. Maybe he is talking about something else. Not a Presidential statement.
No. 2 is Presidential, and is what every President has said and should say since these types of things have been occurring.
No. 3 is Presidential enough I guess, and I agree that we should get down to business. An improved form of vetting immigrants and visitors would be a good start.
No. 4 is stupid, wrong and childish.
Obviously people focus on the things he does that are beneath the office. We should also focus on things he does that reflect positively upon the office. He did that with Gorsuch and with some of his Regulatory rollbacks and deserves credit.
It is not too much to ask that he stop stepping on his crank, however, because anyone who actually cares about this country fells it when he does.
What was that Beatles song? Oh yea, "Twist and Shout!"
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
Capt. Jack Sparrow.
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
If a person is too stupid to understand the subtleties of a post, they may want to refrain from false associations and throwing around words such as 'scumbags'.
Brad Steele
Christianity comprises various religious groups and churches but has one big difference with Muslim religions. Christians don't murder each other over religion, (well there was Ireland) Muslims do. ie: ISIS first terrorist attack in IRAN, yep, Shiite vrs Sunni. No place is totally one or the other but definitely geographic majority's.
ISIS=Sunni
IRAN=Shiite
Saudi Arabia=Sunni
Qatar=Sunni
Sunni = 80%
Shiite+ 20%
According to a study in 2015, Islam has 1.8 billion adherents, making up about 24% of the world population. Most Muslims are either of two denominations: Sunni (80-90%, roughly 1.5 billion people) or Shia (10?20%, roughly 170-340 million people).
Lucky it's not VOTERS.
Suppose IRAN might join the fight against ISIS?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/tehran-attacks-isis-suicide-bomb-iran-first-ever-terrorism-claim-responsibility-parliament-shrine-a7776631.html
Wonder what will be written about the "crusades" of 2016 + ????. Who won and written in which language.
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
If a person is too stupid to understand the subtleties of a post, they may want to refrain from false associations and throwing around words such as 'scumbags'.
bleen you liberal jerk !!
Capt. Jack Sparrow.
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
If a person is too stupid to understand the subtleties of a post, they may want to refrain from false associations and throwing around words such as 'scumbags'.
bleen you liberal jerk !!
Cute.
You misunderstand a post, state basically what I posted and I'm a liberal jerk.
Does this type of deep thought serve you well in real life?
Brad Steele
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by CoolhandLuke
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
The UK needs an "Ethnic" Cleansing...
Milosevic had a problem when he tried to corral mislims. A large part of that problem was us.
The real problem back then was the likes of scumbags like you and Bill Clinton.
I will say they was tired of Muslim Bull poop for the past 300 hundred years so they did what they had too.
Europe needs a Milosevic right this minute, Dude just watch our children die at the explosives of the coward Islamic scumbags.
If a person is too stupid to understand the subtleties of a post, they may want to refrain from false associations and throwing around words such as 'scumbags'.
bleen you liberal jerk !!
Have you had this reading deficit all your life?
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain