leicsmac Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 2 hours ago, The Doctor said: Are you referring to the ruling or the last two pages? Bit of both, really. Seems like I'm (thankfully) wrong about the checks and balances. They exist and appear to be at least partly working.
Guest Bilo Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 26 minutes ago, Voll Blau said: Really classy and dignified response to this shit from Mo Farah. Love Mo, he comes across as such a decent, good hearted bloke.
Strokes Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 2 hours ago, The Doctor said: Reading back through it I'm convinced that there must have been someone posting and getting deleted immediately. The only way it follows at all is as one side of a conversation. No mate, he was literally as random as it looks right now.
AKCJ Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 17 hours ago, Facecloth said: But who's opinion are you questioning? Trump's.
Jimothy Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 1 minute ago, AKCJ said: Trump's. Yeah, see, I don't think he was. He was talking to a magical invisible poster who wasn't posting.
Guest Bilo Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 21 hours ago, leicsmac said: Fair enough. I wouldn't say he looked comfortable about it though and with respect to her Miss Keunssberg is hardly the most vociferous media questioner. Like I said, stick him in front of Paxman for ten minutes and see how he goes. Though of course, as Carl mentions the amount of executive orders (wasn't that a problem for some folks when Obama did what was thought to be too many?) getting signed is definitely a bigger issue.
foxy boxing Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 Mo Farrah doesn't know if he can go home to his family who live in Oregon as he is Muslim and originally from Somalia which is one of the countries people are banned from entering the USA from. trump can not just generalise a whole race and religion because of a few fundamentalists. It is disgraceful and sends out the wrong message that Evan if you are a law abiding citizen who has never committed a crime or been part of a terrorist group, if you are part of a race of people you will be judged as a whole. Utterly disgraceful and goes against freedom and democracy
leicsmac Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 UK petition regarding Trump being allowed to visit the UK but not making a state visit to the Queen @ 350k signatures and rising. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928 Wonder what Parliament will make of it?
Rincewind Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 It will be ignored. Although after a certain amount petitions have to be addressed. Maybe the ruling on this will be changed.
Jon the Hat Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 1 hour ago, leicsmac said: UK petition regarding Trump being allowed to visit the UK but not making a state visit to the Queen @ 350k signatures and rising. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928 Wonder what Parliament will make of it? Like him or not he is the president of the USA, their head of state, and should have full state visit. Respect the nation and office regardless of who sits in the chair.
leicsmac Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 3 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said: Like him or not he is the president of the USA, their head of state, and should have full state visit. Respect the nation and office regardless of who sits in the chair. Open question, because I'm honestly not sure: have we refused state visits based on human rights records before? Given that we let the Chinese leadership in recently, probably not - unless we were blinded by the pound notes they promised for business.
Jimothy Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 1 hour ago, Rincewind said: It will be ignored. Although after a certain amount petitions have to be addressed. Maybe the ruling on this will be changed. Petitions over 10,000 get a response, petitions over 100,000 get considered for debate in parliament. This meets both criteria. If you going to moan about something at least be clued up in the fact ffs.
Stadt Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 Our political system isn't perfect but it's so much better than the US system, I was just wondering if there's the possibility of a vote of no confidence but there is isn't.
leicsmac Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 Oh, and something a bit hidden amongst all the other stuff going on: apparently Steve Bannon is going to be on this administrations security council. Good grief.
Guest the fox Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 4 hours ago, Rincewind said: The funny thing is. War criminals and drone attacks probably killed more civilians in the Arab world in just the last few years
Thracian Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 5 hours ago, Rincewind said: So what are you saying?
leicsmac Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 Just now, Thracian said: So what are you saying? That this ban has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with giving the facade of national security and throwing a bone to...certain areas of support while making sure personal business interests of those in the new administration aren't pissed off?
Firegrande Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 Whatever this might be and however long it might last. But the scary thing about this is that this might actually be a blueprint for other nations who have been looking up to America, have been following America as the trend setters in almost anything and everything. This Trump blueprint, if manages to ride out the initial opposition storm, may just become the blueprint for the larger part of the world! That's worrisome!
Thracian Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 Given that Donald Trump made it clear that he would scrutinise arrivals from Muslim countries far more vigilantly it seems to me that the American people had every opportunity to prevent this in their democratic Presidential election. Yet Trump won by a substantial 306 Electoral College votes to 232. Britain voted for Brexit and lots of the losers started doing everything they can to prevent it. And the same in America.. And the same from the slippery Sturgeon in Scotland who will clearly have as many referendums as she can secure to get her own way despite a decmocratic vote to the contrary. . Theoretically a democracy should allow the elected leaders to implement their policies. It's one reason I've always said I don't believe in them. But democracies we have and I have to ask, does the system have any credibility left given the response to the results of the three democratic votes I've referred too?
Thracian Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 9 minutes ago, Firegrande said: Whatever this might be and however long it might last. But the scary thing about this is that this might actually be a blueprint for other nations who have been looking up to America, have been following America as the trend setters in almost anything and everything. This Trump blueprint, if manages to ride out the initial opposition storm, may just become the blueprint for the larger part of the world! That's worrisome! Why would the broader world adopt something if it didn't work or, in this case, make their countries safer?
Mike Oxlong Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 My guess is that the world is a less safe place for Americans today than it was a week ago.
Jattdogg Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 Trump is a twat and not much else can be said.
Thracian Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 7 minutes ago, Mike Oxlong said: My guess is that the world is a less safe place for Americans today than it was a week ago. You may be right or wrong, but it doesn't address my question.
Thracian Posted 29 January 2017 Posted 29 January 2017 3 minutes ago, Jattdogg said: Trump is a twat and not much else can be said. So millions of Americans vote for "a twat". Just as millions of Brits voted for Brexit. Is everyone "a twat" who disagrees with you?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.