Page 4 of 6 [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

21 Jan 2016, 7:27 pm

The population of the UK is 64.1 million your worried about 577,240 who could be arsed to sign a petition to ban Trump.

You should be thanking them for the free publicity.

This goes to show that "direct democracy" is meaningless. US has its own version with change.org.



AR15000
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

Joined: 19 Jan 2016
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 429
Location: Right behind you

22 Jan 2016, 3:40 am

androbot01 wrote:
CNN

Quote:
London (CNN)Donald Trump was in the spotlight Monday in Britain's Parliament, where lawmakers debated whether the Republican presidential front-runner should be barred from entering the country. The suggestion follows Trump's call to ban Muslims from entering the United States.


Apparently this is unprecedented.


If he becomes elected prez of the USA, they will have no bloody choice but to allow him to enter the country!



CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,137

22 Jan 2016, 5:25 am

AR15000 wrote:
androbot01 wrote:
CNN

Quote:
London (CNN)Donald Trump was in the spotlight Monday in Britain's Parliament, where lawmakers debated whether the Republican presidential front-runner should be barred from entering the country. The suggestion follows Trump's call to ban Muslims from entering the United States.


Apparently this is unprecedented.


If he becomes elected prez of the USA, they will have no bloody choice but to allow him to enter the country!

They'll probably even apologize to him, especially if some terrorist act happens in the UK. I definitely don't want that, but progressives cause a lot of this bs with their "tolerance".



Hopper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,908
Location: North Wayels

22 Jan 2016, 7:18 am

Who will apologise? The people who put together the petition? The MPs who attacked his remarks? Why would they do that?

Terrorist acts have already happened in the UK, and a fair few plots have been foiled. And yet, public and political majority sentiment is against Trump. Which is actually surprising given the media coverage of Muslims:


_________________
Of course, it's probably quite a bit more complicated than that.

You know sometimes, between the dames and the horses, I don't even know why I put my hat on.


ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 77
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,747
Location: On top of the world

22 Jan 2016, 5:36 pm

"Terrorist acts have already happened in the UK, and a fair few plots have been foiled."
And I doubt you've seen the last."

Your system is the system that works for you. In the U.S. it would be strange to hear the same conversation about someone running for a Parliamentary position, but then you never know, we might not like their politics.

The other thing to remember is "fallout" caused by their comments also besmirches our candidate. I can imagine some might benefit but it's, I feel, unfair in this regard.

Apologies about past actions is useless and not required. But just imagine how Great Britain would feel if the places were reversed.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

22 Jan 2016, 5:50 pm

ZenDen wrote:
Your system is the system that works for you. In the U.S. it would be strange to hear the same conversation about someone running for a Parliamentary position, but then you never know, we might not like their politics.


The US has one of the strictest entry requirements of all countries. UK is also strict in some respects.

You can have pretty minor offenses many years ago an you aren't getting through. Watch one of the border agency programs and you well see it is essentially the same.

I agree it is stupid, but people can be silly and that not is exclusive to the UK.

SJWs are in the US too.

My biggest problem is not that people can petition (that is fluff), it is that the Home Secretary has to the power to intervene directly in legal cases such as sentencing, and also in this case. This home sectary has been invoked in publicised beginnings. Previous Home Secretaries have been too as well as entertaining of well know convicts.

I disagree with US state governor who also have the power to intervene in legal cases. Such as pardons. These decisions belong in the courts.

Judicial independence is important.



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,295
Location: New Orleans

22 Jan 2016, 7:33 pm

I thought it would be great, Banned in Britain.

Like Banned in Boston used to sell books and plays.

We have spent several hundred years trying to not be you.

Some things we try to avoid, following the European immigration disaster.

We did not have Empires, occupy other people's countries for hundreds of years, selling protection and opium.

I can understand the British concern, but we are not neck deep in Muslims, and we have a whole lot of guns.

What Trump said, polls have said 25% of American Muslims think violence here in support of worldwide Jihad is needed. Muslims by more than half say Shareia Law should be the only law. Trump thought we should not let unknown fighters from the middle east in until we can identify them.

Besides, we have some remedial work to do, explaining that overthrowing the government by violence, and replacing the legal code by force, are not acceptable religious practices. We told them to start with, you have to support the Constitution to come here, and they said they would. Now we learn their religion allows them to lie to infidels. I am all for religious freedom, and for jailing and deporting those who lie and swear false oaths on immigration papers.

I think we still ban Communists and Anarchists due to their Political goal of overthrowing the United States and replacing it with a Worker's Dictatorship or Nothing. Islam seems to be another incompatible Political System.

Also, tampering with our free and fair domestic elections should earn a lifetime ban from coming here, to any country that does.

Do we care about who is the Prime Minister of the Failed Empire Theme Park and Beer Museum?



CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,137

22 Jan 2016, 10:44 pm

Hopper wrote:
Who will apologise? The people who put together the petition? The MPs who attacked his remarks? Why would they do that?

Terrorist acts have already happened in the UK, and a fair few plots have been foiled. And yet, public and political majority sentiment is against Trump. Which is actually surprising given the media coverage of Muslims:


I meant an event similar to that of what happened in Paris.



Hopper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,908
Location: North Wayels

23 Jan 2016, 5:19 am

You mean a mass shooting? You sort-of-but-definitely-not-really wish a mass shooting on the UK, because that might teach us to not be so 'progressive' and 'tolerant'?

On that note, if it helps, think of Muslims as you do gun owners. Most are fine, solid citizens. An odd few will enage in acts of violence and mass death.

As Barry Shitpeas had it, it must be horrible to be in the midst of an everyday mass shooting, only to realise it's actually a terror attack.



Quote:
Also, tampering with our free and fair domestic elections should earn a lifetime ban from coming here, to any country that does
.

If we're going to go with pot shots at national cliches, some of y'all are not doing much to counter the notion of the US as a land free of self-awareness and irony.

Otherwise, consider my annoyance at your slights against Britain not at your doing so, but that you pick such odd targets. There's so much that's s**t about Britain, and you go with 'you've got Muslims, a failed empire, and beer lol lol'? It's always an education to see what insults the members of another country will level at your own.


_________________
Of course, it's probably quite a bit more complicated than that.

You know sometimes, between the dames and the horses, I don't even know why I put my hat on.


CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,137

23 Jan 2016, 7:42 am

Hopper wrote:
You mean a mass shooting? You sort-of-but-definitely-not-really wish a mass shooting on the UK, because that might teach us to not be so 'progressive' and 'tolerant'?

On that note, if it helps, think of Muslims as you do gun owners. Most are fine, solid citizens. An odd few will enage in acts of violence and mass death.

As Barry Shitpeas had it, it must be horrible to be in the midst of an everyday mass shooting, only to realise it's actually a terror attack.



Quote:
Also, tampering with our free and fair domestic elections should earn a lifetime ban from coming here, to any country that does
.

If we're going to go with pot shots at national cliches, some of y'all are not doing much to counter the notion of the US as a land free of self-awareness and irony.

Otherwise, consider my annoyance at your slights against Britain not at your doing so, but that you pick such odd targets. There's so much that's s**t about Britain, and you go with 'you've got Muslims, a failed empire, and beer lol lol'? It's always an education to see what insults the members of another country will level at your own.

Don't put words in my mouth. I have no desire for there to be a terrorist attack and/or mass shooting in the UK. This doesn't have to do with all Muslims, it has to do with undocumented refugees being accepted into countries in mass droves with no thought of consequences.



CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,137

23 Jan 2016, 7:44 am

There is a huge difference from being "tolerant" and being extremely progressive to the point of complete stupidity.



Hopper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,908
Location: North Wayels

23 Jan 2016, 10:28 am

I don't think you have a straightforward desire, but:

Quote:
They'll probably even apologize to him, especially if some terrorist act happens in the UK. I definitely don't want that, but progressives cause a lot of this bs with their "tolerance".


does sound to me like there's a sense the UK might 'learn a lesson' from such an attack, such that 'we' would then apologise to Trump.

Quote:
This doesn't have to do with all Muslims, it has to do with undocumented refugees


Fine. Then think of undocumented refugees as you would gun owners, etc.

Quote:
being accepted into countries in mass droves with no thought of consequences.


Whatever makes you think no thought is being given to consequences?

There's a minimal risk some terrorists will sneak in and launch an attack. There's a very real risk that many of these refugees will suffer and die without help.

Quote:
There is a huge difference from being "tolerant" and being extremely progressive to the point of complete stupidity.


Phew!


_________________
Of course, it's probably quite a bit more complicated than that.

You know sometimes, between the dames and the horses, I don't even know why I put my hat on.


CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,137

23 Jan 2016, 12:52 pm

Hopper wrote:
I don't think you have a straightforward desire, but:

Quote:
They'll probably even apologize to him, especially if some terrorist act happens in the UK. I definitely don't want that, but progressives cause a lot of this bs with their "tolerance".


does sound to me like there's a sense the UK might 'learn a lesson' from such an attack, such that 'we' would then apologise to Trump.

Quote:
This doesn't have to do with all Muslims, it has to do with undocumented refugees


Fine. Then think of undocumented refugees as you would gun owners, etc.

Quote:
being accepted into countries in mass droves with no thought of consequences.


Whatever makes you think no thought is being given to consequences?

There's a minimal risk some terrorists will sneak in and launch an attack. There's a very real risk that many of these refugees will suffer and die without help.

Quote:
There is a huge difference from being "tolerant" and being extremely progressive to the point of complete stupidity.


Phew!

So, basically the attack in Paris didn't happen? Also, your comment on gun owners tells me how ignorant and biased you are. Not only that, but you didn't even give a valid reason. How is equating undocumented refugees to gun owners, giving a valid reason? Lastly, legal gun ownership requires background checks. That's quite the opposite of being undocumented. It's fine to help people, but not at the expense of putting your own country at risk.



CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,137

23 Jan 2016, 12:56 pm

There are people in the US, the UK and other countries, that are homeless; yet refugees are taken in and given free housing and jobs. You don't see a problem with this? In the US, veterans are dying waiting on their medication and operations. Where is the support for veterans and the homeless?



Hopper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,908
Location: North Wayels

23 Jan 2016, 1:18 pm

CommanderKeen wrote:
So, basically the attack in Paris didn't happen?


Sorry, you've lost me there. Where did I say that?

Quote:
Also, your comment on gun owners tells me how ignorant and biased you are. Not only that, but you didn't even give a valid reason. How is equating undocumented refugees to gun owners, giving a valid reason?


We regularly hear that gun ownership should not be restricted as most gun owners are solid, upstanding citizens. They don't go on rampages or kill spouses or rivals etc.

Somewhat tongue-in-cheek but also sincerely, I applied this thinking to Muslims. You then said you were concerned about undocumented refugees. So I applied it to them.

If one would not attack or even criminalise all gun owners for the violent/murderous actions of a few individuals, nor should one do the same to undocumented refugees.

Quote:
Lastly, legal gun ownership requires background checks. That's quite the opposite of being undocumented. It's fine to help people, but not at the expense of putting your own country at risk.


Gun ownership requires background checks, yet gun owners still kill people. Etc.


_________________
Of course, it's probably quite a bit more complicated than that.

You know sometimes, between the dames and the horses, I don't even know why I put my hat on.