Trump's ban on Muslims

[Aroura]

He's both clever and a puppet.
It's too easy to manipulate him with his ego and need for praise, we've seen this. Doesn't make him stupid or just a figurehead...he's no Bush Jr. But he's still being manipulated by those who aren't so emotionally driven. Bannon and Putin certainly are manipulating him, probably others as well.
That's what I think anyway.

[ReptilianPeon]

Why is Saudi Arabia not included in the list?

They have too much money to be put on the list. The Saudis can buy anything. Just like they purchased a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council.

Why do Muslims escape their countries to come to the west?

Because Saudi funds terrorists and nobody in the West does anything. Then the Russians shoot these terrorists and all of a sudden Russia is a terrible country for shooting people. Hypocrites!

Are they "secret ISIS spies who came to rape blonde women and eat western veggies??"

Not really. Some are working for al-Saud's henchmen, but most want to escape them.

Muslims are tired of war.

As am I.

What makes a beautiful Syrian suffers the cold, waiting in the street for a visa?
Or maybe ride the death boats crossing to Europe.

Terrorists make people run away from their home. They Syrians don't want war. But people love selling weapons to the Saudis.

So..why is Saudi Arabia out the list?
I thought they were terrorists?

They are. But I didn't see nearly as many women protesting this:

---

Where were all of these women who are currently protesting Trump then? Did they protest Obama's friendship with the floggers from Saudi who love to beat women to a pulp? Nothing for the Saudi women beaten and abused whilst Obama happily takes the money.

---

or this:

---

Or then? I didn't see them protesting Hilary's relationship with the butchers in Saudi. We were told "the money doesn't affect her".

---

---

Why is Saudi Arabia not included in the list?

They have too much money to be put on the list. The Saudis can buy anything. Just like they purchased a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council.

Why do Muslims escape their countries to come to the west?

Because Saudi funds terrorists and nobody in the West does anything. Then the Russians shoot these terrorists and all of a sudden Russia is a terrible country for shooting people. Hypocrites!

Are they "secret ISIS spies who came to rape blonde women and eat western veggies??"

Not really. Some are working for al-Saud's henchmen, but most want to escape them.

Muslims are tired of war.

As am I.

What makes a beautiful Syrian suffers the cold, waiting in the street for a visa?
Or maybe ride the death boats crossing to Europe.

Terrorists make people run away from their home. They Syrians don't want war. But people love selling weapons to the Saudis.

So..why is Saudi Arabia out the list?
I thought they were terrorists?

They are. But I didn't see nearly as many women protesting this:

---

Where were all of these women who are currently protesting Trump then? Did they protest Obama's friendship with the floggers from Saudi who love to beat women to a pulp? Nothing for the Saudi women beaten and abused whilst Obama happily takes the money.

---

or this:

---

Or then? I didn't see them protesting Hilary's relationship with the butchers in Saudi. We were told "the money doesn't affect her".

If the Women's March was real opposition it wouldn't make the mainstream news. Kind of like how the 2016 Democracy Spring didn't really make the news. It was rather telling to see ex-DNC member Debbie at the Women's March in Washington D.C..

---

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

I don't mean to high jack the thread, point of view has not been stated yet. His ban on Muslims is a smoke screen. We have bigger problems that is being done behind the scenes of this administration. The internet is under attack again; and I'm scared that we don't have leaders to stop another attack. If we allow the censorship of the very tool we rely for our uncensored news; we won't be able to fight back. How many proxy's and VPN'S do we need to lose before we lose the right to express our self's without fear of repercussions. The reasons why this is crucial is, we need to preserve this tool in order to fight the ban on Muslims, if we allow his plans to remove content that does not favor him. The issues will get worse and it will be much more difficult to fight.

    The people that are experienced in the way of getting around content restrictions will be the ones waging the war. There are so few of us though us though, I remember being a teen and using basic proxy's to bypass content bans in school and on my friends computer. I helped liberate people under a content ban from their parents and schools. But, back then what we did is considered child's play. The process of getting around the locks and blocks are more difficult in today's world.

    His ban on Muslims is a racist law that if allowed will spread will open up more radical measures, cause no one is fighting him. The damage that can done will threaten the way our  society operates. Now, I must admit I'm a bit selfish that I advocate for the internet over peoples rights. My entire life is centered around the internet, and I don't want my way of life threatened in anyway, shape, and or form. If enough people was to move on his ban of Muslims in a similar response to the S.O.P.A or P.I.P.A bills. We could in effect stop them from proceeding further and make anything he wants to do a futile effort.

---

---

---

Sure, by all means, let's not worry about how our actions help them grow in numbers.  Let's just play terrorist whack-a-mole for the rest of our lives.  That's worked really well for us so far.

It's precisely that kind of reckless attitude that has gotten us into this mess in the first place.

---

---

---

You are the embodiment of cavalier stupidity.

---

       How did you reach the point of view that we directly enjoyed burning people alive? I'm really curious about the sources of your information that led to that though.

Remember how we roasted people in Dresden Germany and Tokyo?  We used flame throwers on enemy soldiers.  If it hadn't been for the nukes (which vaporized people) we would have burned Japan to the ground.   

You can Google the pictures.  The Draft feature isn't working so I can't do multiple links.  

Personally I think it takes someone who enjoys burning people alive to use a flame thrower on someone instead of just shooting him or blowing him up with a grenade.  

Blowing someone up with a high explosive bomb dropped from an airplane is bad but necessary.  However, to willingly drop firebombs on people requires that you like it.  We even did it in Vietnam.

[downbeatplumb]

Trump is no one's puppet.  That should be obvious.

His character is very easily explained by psychology.

He is a child, he never grew up.  He never had to deal with any repercussions that taught him how to properly behave with decorum.  

He is spoiled to the point where he will always fight for his way.

The fact that he behaves like a child is what is most dangerous about him.

I heard the same description of Caligula.

[henryp]

I don't think worrying how ISIS is going to spin the news should be a factor in any decision.  We've been bombing their countries, toppling their leaders, and are best friends with Israel for decades.  The ship has sailed on ISIS not having any recruiting material.

Sure, by all means, let's not worry about how our actions help them grow in numbers.  Let's just play terrorist whack-a-mole for the rest of our lives.  That's worked really well for us so far.

It's precisely that kind of reckless attitude that has gotten us into this mess in the first place.

The assumption I'm not buying into, is that the 6 month travel ban is helping them grow in numbers.
I think 'emboldening the terrorists!' is more of a cable news quality talking point than a reality on these smaller scale items.  
Now toppling their governments, blowing up their cities, and being at the heart of horrifying chaos that ruins the lives of millions is a different story.  But this isn't that.

[robvalue]

Muslims are now banned! Anyone caught with a Muslim in their deck during the tournament will be disqualified.

[Sterben]

---

I don't mean to high jack the thread, point of view has not been stated yet. His ban on Muslims is a smoke screen. We have bigger problems that is being done behind the scenes of this administration. The internet is under attack again; and I'm scared that we don't have leaders to stop another attack. If we allow the censorship of the very tool we rely for our uncensored news; we won't be able to fight back. How many proxy's and VPN'S do we need to lose before we lose the right to express our self's without fear of repercussions. The reasons why this is crucial is, we need to preserve this tool in order to fight the ban on Muslims, if we allow his plans to remove content that does not favor him. The issues will get worse and it will be much more difficult to fight.

    The people that are experienced in the way of getting around content restrictions will be the ones waging the war. There are so few of us though us though, I remember being a teen and using basic proxy's to bypass content bans in school and on my friends computer. I helped liberate people under a content ban from their parents and schools. But, back then what we did is considered child's play. The process of getting around the locks and blocks are more difficult in today's world.

    His ban on Muslims is a racist law that if allowed will spread will open up more radical measures, cause no one is fighting him. The damage that can done will threaten the way our  society operates. Now, I must admit I'm a bit selfish that I advocate for the internet over peoples rights. My entire life is centered around the internet, and I don't want my way of life threatened in anyway, shape, and or form. If enough people was to move on his ban of Muslims in a similar response to the S.O.P.A or P.I.P.A bills. We could in effect stop them from proceeding further and make anything he wants to do a futile effort.

---

---

Remember how we roasted people in Dresden Germany and Tokyo?  We used flame throwers on enemy soldiers.  If it hadn't been for the nukes (which vaporized people) we would have burned Japan to the ground.   

You can Google the pictures.  The Draft feature isn't working so I can't do multiple links.  

Personally I think it takes someone who enjoys burning people alive to use a flame thrower on someone instead of just shooting him or blowing him up with a grenade.  

Blowing someone up with a high explosive bomb dropped from an airplane is bad but necessary.  However, to willingly drop firebombs on people requires that you like it.  We even did it in Vietnam.

        I would agree to certain extent, napalm was used to help clear the jungles out in The Vietnam war; beyond that it was cruel to use to in war. The flame thrower it self has always been questionable weapon, it had limited use other then for short range purposes. I'm sure some did enjoy dropping napalm, and setting people on fire to get their jolly's. I've seen the pictures and rare footage of burning men, woman, and children in both wars. The flame thrower was also used in the first world war by the Germans. Where i disagree with you is the fact we liked it seeing people on fire. If you set a city or a village on fire your sending a strong message that an invading army is going to burn as many as we can out of a deep rooted hatred.

       Seeing it with your eyes happening right in front of you must been horrifying. Those mental scars will last a life time, I'm also willing to bet that a lot solders regretted having to set another human being on fire. The smell of rotting human flesh must been of been something you got use to though. As long as you masked it behind the thought *I'm doing the right thing for my country.*

[ukatheist]

Looks like ban 2.0 is imminent...

Trump to sign new immigration order - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39183153

Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk

[Thumpalumpacus]

Remember how we roasted people in Dresden Germany and Tokyo?  We used flame throwers on enemy soldiers.  If it hadn't been for the nukes (which vaporized people) we would have burned Japan to the ground.   

You can Google the pictures.  The Draft feature isn't working so I can't do multiple links.  

Personally I think it takes someone who enjoys burning people alive to use a flame thrower on someone instead of just shooting him or blowing him up with a grenade.  

Blowing someone up with a high explosive bomb dropped from an airplane is bad but necessary.  However, to willingly drop firebombs on people requires that you like it.  We even did it in Vietnam.

        I would agree to certain extent, napalm was used to help clear the jungles out in The Vietnam war; beyond that it was cruel to use to in war. The flame thrower it self has always been questionable weapon, it had limited use other then for short range purposes. I'm sure some did enjoy dropping napalm, and setting people on fire to get their jolly's. I've seen the pictures and rare footage of burning men, woman, and children in both wars. The flame thrower was also used in the first world war by the Germans. Where i disagree with you is the fact we liked it seeing people on fire. If you set a city or a village on fire your sending a strong message that an invading army is going to burn as many as we can out of a deep rooted hatred.

       Seeing it with your eyes happening right in front of you must been horrifying. Those mental scars will last a life time, I'm also willing to bet that a lot solders regretted having to set another human being on fire. The smell of rotting human flesh must been of been something you got use to though. As long as you masked it behind the thought *I'm doing the right thing for my country.*

Remember, the GIs who used flamethrowers in the Pacific war were fighting an enemy very willing to fight to the last man (of 3,636 Japanese troops defending Tarawa, only 17 were captured -- all the rest had to be killed), who was usually honeycombed into the ground. Even though that war in particular was a deeply racist war from both sides, I agree with you that most Americans did not enjoy using flamethrowers ... or enjoy any other aspect of the war, for that matter.

[Amarok]

So after a massive fuck up  on the first ban they decide to fuck up slightly less on one hand and even more on the other. By taking Iraqi off the list making it even weaker .And also claiming that 300 immigrants are being investigated by the FBI without a single document to back it up . The stupidity of this man begins belief.