Trump's Ban

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:05 pm

biggles wrote:putting aside all the guess-work; the american president has taken steps to tighten his country's security from, statistically, it's biggest threat! what a git! and people who don't like him are upset. is that about it?

So why on earth isn't Saudi Arabia on the list then, considering, statistically, it has provided more terrorists than any other country in the Middle East?

biggles · Post by **biggles** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:16 pm

lancaster - maybe he can't do anything about that. spijed - i'm not pretending to know every detail about this thing. i guess he simply had to do something, though. i mean, when the terrorists strike again, in america, and they surely will, at least no-one can say he did nothing to improve security. maybe he made the decision under advice?

box_of_frogs · Post by **box_of_frogs** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:17 pm

He's the boss over there whether most of us like it or not. His country, his rules. Why people are protesting over here I'll never know. If they have a problem with it then why don't they foxtrot oscar over to Washington DC and protest?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:20 pm

What advice?

His chief of homeland security found out about it from the tv. Surely he should be consulted first?

biggles · Post by **biggles** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:23 pm

i would imagine he has many advisors. some probably higher in the pecking order than the one you mentioned.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:26 pm

What, his chief of homeland security, the bloke in charge of the policy?

Yeah, why involve him!

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:28 pm

Thing is, just like Bush and his 2nd invasion of Iraq, the repercussions of this policy will be felt for decades.

Thats what really bothers me, is that the US have learnt nothing (and that goes for Obama as well to be fair) about how to deal with terrorism.

kentonclaret · Post by **kentonclaret** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:31 pm

The biggest threat to the security and well-being of Americans is fellow Americans.

You are far more likely to be gunned down by a fellow citizen than blown up by a refugee to the country (muslim or otherwise).

biggles · Post by **biggles** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:32 pm

his chief of staff, yeah why involve him and all his other advisors.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:36 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Then you need to reread.

Obama didn't place any real additional restrictions on people from those countries since people from those countries didn't have visa free access to the US in the first place. What Obama did was make it so that if you or I visited those countries then we (as Brits) lost our visa-free access and so had to go through the same kind process as anyone else from those countries in order to enter the country.

That is nothing like what Trump has done. Any anyone who tries to portray them as simple an extention of already existing restrictions is either ignorant or lying.

Out of interest, why are you so set against what he's done?

Doesn't it make sense to you?
It does to me, but he's just being over stupid about how he's handling it.

biggles · Post by **biggles** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:38 pm

he's probably just sending a message

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:38 pm

quoonbeatz wrote:no, its because its controversial.

it doesn't matter who is responsible.

you need to get over obama, he's not relevant anymore. trump is the president. only what he does matters.

Obama is relevant, just like Bush is when you want to see where a lot of these problems started, just like Bush snr before him etc.

You can't just write off what the previous bloke in charge did when the current bloke has only been in the job for a week or so.

America's problems didn't start with Trump, although I doubt he will get rid of many issues.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:50 pm

quoonbeatz wrote:no, its because its controversial.

it doesn't matter who is responsible.

you need to get over obama, he's not relevant anymore. trump is the president. only what he does matters.

I don't need to get over anything.
I'm not part of the crowd who is getting hysterical about the immigration policy of a foreign country.
If I wanted to do that there are multiple other countries I would take issue with before the USA.
We can only discuss the parts of the topic that you feel suits your angle though if you like?

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:54 pm

I don't think we should ban Trump. Banning people from travel is lowering ourselves to the sort of mindless stupidity Trump has recently shown.

Like him or not, he is the elected representative of America and we do rely on international trade, especially following Brexit. The USA is a place many of us have visited and experienced the warmth and hospitality of most Americans.

Too many people are just making political capital out of the current situation and their long standing dislike for Trump. Let him come and maybe protest.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:55 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Out of interest, why are you so set against what he's done?

Doesn't it make sense to you?
It does to me, but he's just being over stupid about how he's handling it.

I'm against it because I believe this is about his campaign promise to ban Muslims from going to America, and I've explained earlier why I think that, and the reason I'm opposed to that is because discrimination against those of a particular religion is not supposed to be what America is about.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:55 pm

The US already had extremely tight security in place for people entering the country, and there's no evidence to say it needed to be increased. Like his wall, this is just a pointless thing that will sink America's standing in the world.

bluelabrador16 · Post by **bluelabrador16** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:31 pm

Lancasterclaret

"..the US have learnt nothing (and that goes for Obama as well to be fair) about how to deal with terrorism...."

At least Trump is against ISIS, unlike Obama who supported them.

"Work with our Arab allies and friends in the Middle East in the fight against ISIS.

Pursue aggressive joint and coalition military operations to crush and destroy ISIS, international cooperation to cutoff their funding, expand intelligence sharing, and cyberwarfare to disrupt and disable their propaganda and recruiting."

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/f ... ating-isis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:38 pm

Damo wrote:I don't need to get over anything.
I'm not part of the crowd who is getting hysterical about the immigration policy of a foreign country.
If I wanted to do that there are multiple other countries I would take issue with before the USA.
We can only discuss the parts of the topic that you feel suits your angle though if you like?

You're the one wazzing on about Obama on a thread about Trump. Presumably it suits your angle.

Fortunately for me I don't have an angle, I just call things as I see them. You need to live in the now. It doesn't matter what Obama did, it's all about Trump now. Just as it would have been all about Clinton.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:40 pm

To be fair, it never mattered what Obama did, he was always painted as a hero and bastion of all things good regardless.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:53 pm

ClaretMoffitt wrote:To be fair, it never mattered what Obama did, he was always painted as a hero and bastion of all things good regardless.

Do you have any idea how pathetic you look when you say things like this? The fact that you don't know anything about what disappointed liberals about Obama, and think that he was infallible in their eyes tells me all i need to know about how little you know.

You seem to believe the right-wing media's narrative that Obama was an abject failure of a president and that any defence of him against unfair criticism is therefore an endorsement of his entire presidency. It's pathetic and makes you come across as a petulent, right-wing ideologue.

If you think Obama was a failure and that liberals are blinded to his inadequacies then why don't you point a few out? Instead of just posting vague, snarky comments that show you want to project a sence of being informed without it actually being true.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:55 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Do you have any idea how pathetic you look when you say things like this? The fact that you don't know anything about what disappointed liberals about Obama, and think that he was infallible in their eyes tells me all i need to know about how little you know.

You seem to believe the right-wing media's narrative that Obama was an abject failure of a president and that any defence of him against unfair criticism is therefore an endorsement of his entire presidency. It's pathetic and makes you come across as a petulent, right-wing ideologue.

If you think Obama was a failure and that liberals are blinded to his inadequacies then why don't you point a few out? Instead of just posting vague, snarky comments that show you want to project a sence of being informed without it actually being true.

Drone strikes, and lots of them.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:05 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I'm against it because I believe this is about his campaign promise to ban Muslims from going to America, and I've explained earlier why I think that, and the reason I'm opposed to that is because discrimination against those of a particular religion is not supposed to be what America is about.

So you're against him fulfilling his campaign promise?
Ok.

At this moment in time one of the biggest perceived threats to the USA comes from Muslims, especially those who've possibly visited certain parts of the world that are known Isis hotspots.
So logically putting in place restrictions on certain places/people will make sense.
It doesn't make sense to the hand wringers in society, but to the people who voted him in, it's what he promised to do.

Same with the wall across the south, unemployment etc.
He's seen to be doing the things he campaigned about.

You disagree with it, which is fine, but he isn't doing it to please people outside of the US.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:07 pm

ClaretMoffitt wrote:Drone strikes, and lots of them.

You think liberals were OK with his use of drones? Have you even been paying attention these last 8 years? People like me have been calling America's (and yes, that means Obama's) use of drones akin to terrorism for years. Republican's love his use of drones though, which is why the only voices you'll hear criticising him on the topic are liberal ones.

Maybe when you said he can do no wrong you mean except this, so try again.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:14 pm

Sidney1st wrote:So you're against him fulfilling his campaign promise?
Ok.

At this moment in time one of the biggest perceived threats to the USA comes from Muslims, especially those who've possibly visited certain parts of the world that are known Isis hotspots.
So logically putting in place restrictions on certain places/people will make sense.
It doesn't make sense to the hand wringers in society, but to the people who voted him in, it's what he promised to do.

Same with the wall across the south, unemployment etc.
He's seen to be doing the things he campaigned about.

You disagree with it, which is fine, but he isn't doing it to please people outside of the US.

Before i even bother with your future posts, have you at least understood why this is nothing like what Obama did? Obama made people who would otherwise have visa-free access to the US need a visa if they visited one of those 7 countries. Trump is banning everyone from those 7 countries from visiting the US. Do you at least understand how much different those two things are? If not then we're wasting each other's time.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:16 pm

quoonbeatz wrote:You're the one wazzing on about Obama on a thread about Trump. Presumably it suits your angle.

Fortunately for me I don't have an angle, I just call things as I see them. You need to live in the now. It doesn't matter what Obama did, it's all about Trump now. Just as it would have been all about Clinton.

How very simplistic

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:20 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:You think liberals were OK with his use of drones? Have you even been paying attention these last 8 years? People like me have been calling America's (and yes, that means Obama's) use of drones akin to terrorism for years. Republican's love his use of drones though, which is why the only voices you'll hear criticising him on the topic are liberal ones.

Maybe when you said he can do no wrong you mean except this, so try again.

Really? Because I have seen more outrage in the last week alone over his stupid "pussy" comments and a 90 day suspension on travel from some muslim countries than I saw against Obama in 8 years for his drone strikes.

Probably just all my imagination though, or i'm just being manipulated by the right wing propaganda.

Cirrus_Minor · Post by **Cirrus_Minor** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:23 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Statistically, the biggest threat to US life is white, US males with guns.

He's ignored that for some really strange reason.

Absolutely correct. All terrorist attacks since 9/11 have been by American citizens.

Caernarfon_Claret · Post by **Caernarfon_Claret** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:27 pm

The Problem with Countries where the vast majority of the population are immigrants (USA, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Argentina and a score of others) and have suppressed the indigenous peoples is they look incredibly stupid when talking about immigration as they were the ones who caused the problem in the first place by overcrowding and messing up Countries/Continents which were at one time spacious and well balanced.

Indecisive · Post by **Indecisive** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:27 pm

biggles wrote:putting aside all the guess-work; the american president has taken steps to tighten his country's security from, statistically, it's biggest threat! what a git! and people who don't like him are upset. is that about it?

What statistics is he using....out of interest?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:32 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Before i even bother with your future posts, have you at least understood why this is nothing like what Obama did? Obama made people who would otherwise have visa-free access to the US need a visa if they visited one of those 7 countries. Trump is banning everyone from those 7 countries from visiting the US. Do you at least understand how much different those two things are? If not then we're wasting each other's time.

Ah you're priming yourself up to call me stupid aren't you so you can get out of talking to me about it?

Apparently Obama is irrelevant according to someone else on this thread, so keep up.

He's banned them for a period of 90 days hasn't he?
What's wrong with that?
If he feels that there's a viable threat then he's well within his rights to do something about it.
He's going about it the wrong way though, because Muslims who want to attack the US mainland can come from all over the world.
Would you rather he just let everyone in without worrying about it?

Its a bit of a rock and a hard place situation isn't it really?
He's promised to try and stop the threat, campaigned on it and when he's doing something he's being vilified.
If he did nothing and someone then travelled to the US and caused a massacre he'd get vilified for not keeping his campaign promise.

You're waving your arms around about it, whereas I can see why he's doing it and don't feel the need to wail about how unfair it all is.
He does however need to ensure that current muslim citizens of the US, or those with green cards & visas issued before a set date are allowed back into the country.
He also needs to make sure that Muslims who currently reside in the US aren't abused.

Are we ok to carry on talking or shall I just resort to calling you stupid like you're absolutely dying to do to me?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:39 pm

ClaretMoffitt wrote:Really? Because I have seen more outrage in the last week alone over his stupid "pussy" comments and a 90 day suspension on travel from some muslim countries than I saw against Obama in 8 years for his drone strikes.

Probably just all my imagination though, or i'm just being manipulated by the right wing propaganda.

Then you've not been paying attention.

I could spend a good amout of time researching a whole bunch of examples of when liberals have publically criticised Obama for his use of drones. I could even find a bunch of examples of how liberals have been mocked for their outrage over it by right-wingers, inparticular his assassination of an American citizen.

I could link you to videos of liberals in the mainstream US media strongly criticising Obama but that would be a waste of time too, you wouldn't watch them. I could link mainstream media articles slamming him for it, but you wouldn't read them. How do I know this? Because earlier today, in this thread, i spent more time than you deserved explaining to you the point of view of those you mockingly dismiss, and instead of responding intelligently you decided to first mock me for the time of day I posted it, and then you mocked the effort i put in to explaining it to you.

The only reason i bother to engage with you this time was because i forgot your posts earlier.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:43 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Then you've not been paying attention.

I could spend a good amout of time researching a whole bunch of examples of when liberals have publically criticised Obama for his use of drones. I could even find a bunch of examples of how liberals have been mocked for their outrage over it by right-wingers, inparticular his assassination of an American citizen.

I could link you to videos of liberals in the mainstream US media strongly criticising Obama but that would be a waste of time too, you wouldn't watch them. I could link mainstream media articles slamming him for it, but you wouldn't read them. How do I know this? Because earlier today, in this thread, i spent more time than you deserved explaining to you the point of view of those you mockingly dismiss, and instead of responding intelligently you decided to first mock me for the time of day I posted it, and then you mocked the effort i put in to explaining it to you.

The only reason i bother to engage with you this time was because i forgot your posts earlier.

Could you link me any videos of 300,000 strong protests in Washington or 1 million strong petitions in the uk, and global protests of all sizes elsewhere? If not, then you will not convince me the two are equivalent.

LaLigaClaret · Post by **LaLigaClaret** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:45 pm

Oh dear oh dear I see the Board's biggest and most persistent wind-up merchant Irritating Turtle is at his pedantic semantics again. Time to completely obliterate his incoherent ramblings yet again. So lets get to the facts.

Donald Trump is US President and he has the right to sign Executive Orders.
The USA's border control policy is a matter for the USA and not whinging, tree hugging vegan happy clappy moronic half wits who still think the earth is flat.
The moratorium is not a ban.
The moratorium is temporary.
The moratorium is not a ban on muslim people as clearly demonstrated by the fact that muslim people from loads of other countries can freely enter the USA.
Britons and Britons with duel passports are not affected.
The moratorium is to increase security vetting of people trying to enter the USA from countries identified as having endemic terrorism.
The moratorium was actually mirroring Obama's law passed in 2015 which identified precisely the same 7 countries when Obama told his country to prevent by slowing down and delaying people from those countries from entering the USA.
President Obama previously banned all entrants from Iran.
The previous 5 US Presidents ALL had bans on certain countries stopping people from specific countries to the US.
Only 109 people questioned since the moratorium of those only 12 detained but ALL since allowed in.
All people entering the US are subject to homeland security and the moratorium is only an extension of this,
Britain has banned people from entering the UK so we have done similar things.
Donald Trump was voted in and everyone knew he was going to do this.

This is all part of an orchestrated campaign but the sad losers who can't accept they lost.

GAME. SET and MATCH

Oh and to the all Corbynista's out there come 2020 the Labour Party will be destroyed, not for one election but permanently. That pillock would if Putin was going to invade not alert our troops to protect you but instead invite him for tea and cakes to discuss how much pollution the tanks would cause. I have voted Labour all my life but they are completely unelectable and a total disgrace. I really hope they lose all their MP's what a lame brained moron he is.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:45 pm

He can't because no one was that arsed when Obama was using drones, or at least not arsed enough to protest about it with any real effort.

People just don't like Trump, so it won't matter if he does anything vaguely sensible or understandable, people will protest and whine.

I suspect if Clinton had been sworn in, instead of Trump, no one would be protesting if she led the US into another war, they'd probably find it acceptable.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:55 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Ah you're priming yourself up to call me stupid aren't you so you can get out of talking to me about it?

Err... no.

Apparently Obama is irrelevant according to someone else on this thread, so keep up.

So?

He's banned them for a period of 90 days hasn't he?

Trump? Yes.

What's wrong with that?

On its own, not much. It'd be dumb, but whatever. Unfortunately this isn't on it's own because he's previously promised to ban Muslims from entering the US simply because they're Muslims. I, and millions of others, feel that we can see through what we believe is a bullshit rationale to ban whole nations of people, none of whom have committed any terrorist killings in the United States since at least before 9/11, purely because they are majority Muslim countries. I also don't for one second believe 90 days will be the end of it, or that only these 7 nationalities will see such travel bans. I think i've been clear about this a few times now.

If he feels that there's a viable threat then he's well within his rights to do something about it.

Well, no. Not really. A religious test to get into America is unconstitutional.

He's going about it the wrong way though, because Muslims who want to attack the US mainland can come from all over the world.
Would you rather he just let everyone in without worrying about it?

Yes. Absolutely. Let everyone in. That's literally the only possible alternative.

Its a bit of a rock and a hard place situation isn't it really?
He's promised to try and stop the threat, campaigned on it and when he's doing something he's being vilified.

That's his own stupid fault for making such dumb-as-**** promises.

If he did nothing and someone then travelled to the US and caused a massacre he'd get vilified for not keeping his campaign promise.

Again, that's his stupid fault.

You're waving your arms around about it, whereas I can see why he's doing it and don't feel the need to wail about how unfair it all is.

He does however need to ensure that current muslim citizens of the US, or those with green cards & visas issued before a set date are allowed back into the country.
He also needs to make sure that Muslims who currently reside in the US aren't abused.

The idea that he's going to protect Muslim Americans is a fanciful one. This is someone who has defended his own violent supporters by calling them "very passionate" when confronted with the violence they're committing against others.

Are we ok to carry on talking or shall I just resort to calling you stupid like you're absolutely dying to do to me?

For this you can go **** yourself. When have i ever called you stupid?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:02 pm

You've never called me stupid, but you appeared to be on the verge of it.

He's just taken Obama's restrictions one step further.
Whilst someone else on here is claiming it isn't relevant what Obama had going on, I feel it is.

Trump hasn't banned all Muslims from around the world from entering the US, as you've alluded too, it would be unconstitutional, he's just carried on with what Obama was doing, just more forcefully.
There were no protests when that was introduced.
There were no protesters at Minneapolis airport when all men of middle eastern origin were being stopped whilst 90% of white men were allowed to carry on through.

That was either down to people being ignorant of these things happening, or its only an issue now Trump is doing it.
Which do you think it is?

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:03 pm

Could somebody please show me where Trump has banned a religion from entering America as claimed by IT. I thought he had banned people from specific countries ?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:04 pm

ClaretMoffitt wrote:Could you link me any videos of 300,000 strong protests in Washington or 1 million strong petitions in the uk, and global protests of all sizes elsewhere? If not, then you will not convince me the two are equivalent.

Wow. You've had those goalposts fitted with wheels, haven't you?

When did this become about opposition to Obama's drone stikes being equal to the opposition towards Trump's presidency? I'm pretty sure it just started off with you complaining that Obama could do no wrong in the eyes of us liberals. But now that i've pointed out that your one example of Obama being awful is actually something that liberals very much opposed it's suddenly about whether liberals opposed it as much as everyone seems to oppose Trump.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:04 pm

FCBurnley wrote:Could somebody please show me where Trump has banned a religion from entering America as claimed by IT. I thought he had banned people from specific countries ?

Where did i claim he has done that?

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:05 pm

Post 38 this page (188) answer 5

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:12 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Wow. You've had those goalposts fitted with wheels, haven't you?

When did this become about opposition to Obama's drone stikes being equal to the opposition towards Trump's presidency? I'm pretty sure it just started off with you complaining that Obama could do no wrong in the eyes of us liberals. But now that i've pointed out that your one example of Obama being awful is actually something that liberals very much opposed it's suddenly about whether liberals opposed it as much as everyone seems to oppose Trump.

That was the general jist of my complaint. The fact that no major protest in 8 years took place over actually killing innocent people and destabilising entire continents. No pouring of celebrities denouncing their president, no faux tears from politicians, no huge petitions, no widespread outcry from major media and popular culture. Hardly anything.

Surely even you can see the hypocrisy and opportunism in all this hysteria?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:18 pm

Sidney1st wrote:You've never called me stupid, but you appeared to be on the verge of it.

He's just taken Obama's restrictions one step further.
Whilst someone else on here is claiming it isn't relevant what Obama had going on, I feel it is.

Trump hasn't banned all Muslims from around the world from entering the US, as you've alluded too, it would be unconstitutional, he's just carried on with what Obama was doing, just more forcefully.
There were no protests when that was introduced.
There were no protesters at Minneapolis airport when all men of middle eastern origin were being stopped whilst 90% of white men were allowed to carry on through.

That was either down to people being ignorant of these things happening, or its only an issue now Trump is doing it.
Which do you think it is?

I can't get through to you, I don't know why. If you really, honestly think this is just the next logical step from Obama's restrictions then the fact that Obama didn't place any restrictions on the nationalities of anyone isn't going to matter. All Obama did was (is this the 4th time i've explained it now?) make people need visas who otherwise didn't need them if they visited one of those countries. Do you really think the next logical step from that is to ban entire nationalities from travelling to the US?

And i never said, nor alluded to, Trump successfully banning all Muslims. It's a misrepresentation to say i did.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:20 pm

We've had concerned people listed as
Tree huggers
Vegans
Happy clappers
Half wit morons
Cry arses
Dippy students
Virgins

And probably more. Say what you want about Trump but his style rubs off on people.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:21 pm

Yeah the alluded too was a typo, it referred to the unconstitutional part of my sentence, my bad.

So Obama makes then need Visas, Trump just makes it more difficult for 90 days.
Just the next step up really.

If Obama had done the same as Trump I doubt there would be the out pouring of hand wringing like there has been this last week.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:22 pm

FCBurnley wrote:Post 38 this page (188) answer 5

That doesn't say, or even imply, what you think it does. Keep trying though.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:28 pm

Spijed wrote:So why on earth isn't Saudi Arabia on the list then, considering, statistically, it has provided more terrorists than any other country in the Middle East?

Oil.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:33 pm

Damo wrote:How very simplistic

I made it so to help you keep up.

You still seem to be struggling though so I'll leave you to it.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:40 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Oil.

A very legitimate and fair criticism, can add Pakistan and the UAE to that list as well.

It doesn't generate enough shock value though so better simply to brand this whole thing a "muslim ban" rather than stick to the real criticisms.

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:40 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:That doesn't say, or even imply, what you think it does. Keep trying though.

Now you are simply lying. Nothing new in that though.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:42 pm

ClaretMoffitt wrote:A very legitimate and fair criticism, can add Pakistan and the UAE to that list as well.

It doesn't generate enough shock value though so better simply to brand this whole thing a "muslim ban" rather than stick to the real criticisms.

Sorry, meant to quote spijed there.