It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
low rated
avatar
tinyE: I got rid of my American flag but my Netherlands flag still hangs proudly in my room.
avatar
51nikopol: How is the raft to Canada coming along? Are you looking at the east coast, west coast or upper Canada? FYI the weather is better in lower mainland B.C. if you don't mind the rain. We do get US tv channels so you can get the good commercials during the Superbowl. (Go Falcons)

I saw a poster the other day on social media that I think hits the nail on the head, It said, "Don't blame Trump he did everything during the campaign to not get elected!!"
I was joking before. Now however I'm actually looking out at the water as I sit here and type thinking, "It's only 50 miles. I could do it."
low rated
avatar
RWarehall: Right. So no one had an agenda when they took pictures from the back of the crowd on the day of the inauguration and put them side-by-side with Obama's first inauguration, right? This wasn't intended by the media to demean or belittle Trump or play politics? They were being "fair and balanced" right? Just reporting the news? Bullshit.

How naive of you.
avatar
Pheace: Get over yourself. Like there wouldn't have been side to sides comparing if Trumps crowd had been bigger. So boohoo, the press is highlighting how his inaugurations crowd didn't compare to the last presidents inauguration crowd. Like Obama didn't have 8 years of crap being thrown at him in the news, including from Donald Trump *himself*. Had Trump not bothered to respond it, not *falsely* claimed his crowd was bigger, it wouldn't have even been news the next day. Instead he not only let's it trigger him, he uses the White house resources to try and mislead the public.

You're not seriously telling me this is a proper reaction by the white house to criticism (is it even?) are you?
And you are telling me that is a proper reaction from the media? It's only proper if you are a one-sided extremist. How about you get over yourself asshole. We have some dickhead from the Netherlands who gets all his information about the U.S. from watching T.V. Makes you an uninformed loser. Seriously, go fuck yourself! All you idiots do is find everything to complain about. Trump is not destroying the world and the fact that all you hear about him comes through the media should give you a clue who is really at fault for all this partisanship. But hey, you can't rub those two remaining brain cells together enough to make a cogent thought and figure out that maybe most of our problems are the clickbait media who keep baiting uninformed losers like you who cannot think for yourself. I remember all the Rush Limbaugh losers who followed every word he said and believed it word for word and now uninformed people on the left are doing the same thing. It's why Dtgreene can never get any facts straight and spouts out unintelligible garbage most of the time.

As to the rest of these uninformed idiots. There are two basketball players potentially affected and neither one is a U.S. citizen. Thon Maker is a Australian citizen born in Sudan but travels with an Australian passport and he arrived in the U.S. without incident from a game in Toronto. Apparently that was not an issue. Luol Deng is a British Dual-citizen with his native Sudan. It's unclear if that will create a problem. Neither has had an issue to date. Either way, a bunch of you need to get your facts straight.

No U.S. Citizen has a problem. Right now, the issue seems to be those who have just travel Visas or are connecting directly with one of those 7 countries by flight. This is why there was no issue with Thon Maker who was coming back from Toronto.

Edit: Looking further, the issue are those who retain citizenship or dual-citizenship with one of those 7 countries. So Luol Deng will have to get an exception but Thon Maker seems to be in the clear as he does not hold citizenship with Sudan. So in the case of DaCostaBR's friend, the issue will be if he is still a citizen of Iran.
Post edited January 29, 2017 by RWarehall
low rated
RWarehall you need to be careful.

One of the first groups Hitler went after following the Jews were the mentally handicapped.

If Trump follows suit, he's likely to do the same, and then you're fucked. :P
avatar
tinyE: I was joking before. Now however I'm actually looking out at the water as I sit here and type thinking, "It's only 50 miles. I could do it."
Might be not a bad idea, considering shit that is about to happen (Hillary's/Barry's legacy lives! Yay!):
'Safe Zones': Trump's Idea Evokes Strong Memories of Hillary Clinton's Old Plan
American military base in northern part of Syria - USA invaded Syria, just like in dark medieval ages (Just to remind you, Russia is a strategical military ally of Syria and all it's bases are approved by Syrian government).
SU-24 bombs secret American military base in Syria - Americans called F-15 to protect them, but F-15 was late for the party (invaders were fragged).

It seems, there is no difference between Hillary-shmillary or something, USA will continue it's expansionist politics no matter what. Crimea returned to Russia thanks to stupid Barry's aggressive politics, due to need for a naval base in Black sea in a sight of increased military conflict (they seized Ukraine through a coup).
avatar
tinyE: RWarehall you need to be careful.

One of the first groups Hitler went after following the Jews were the mentally handicapped.

If Trump follows suit, he's likely to do the same, and then you're fucked. :P
Yeah TinyE, fuck you too.
low rated
avatar
RWarehall: And you are telling me that is a proper reaction from the media?
This is what the media does. It tries to find news, it analyzes, compares, and yes sensationalizes or overblows arguments on a regular basis.

Guess what? This is nothing new... It's been happening for ages and Trump isn't some special snowflake getting special treatment. He's throwing himself into the news day after day with his *own* actions, and often of his own volition (twitter). And guess what? His behavior isn't exactly popular. It's fine as some eccentric billionaire no one cares about. It's another matter entirely when you're *representing* a whole nation. Of course every step from a controversial candidate like him is getting scrutinized, and it's not going to stop, nor should it.

It's only proper if you are a one-sided extremist. How about you get over yourself asshole. We have some dickhead from the Netherlands who gets all his information about the U.S. from watching T.V. Makes you an uninformed loser. Seriously, go fuck yourself! All you idiots do is find everything to complain about. Trump is not destroying the world and the fact that all you hear about him comes through the media should give you a clue who is really at fault for all this partisanship.
Ow here come the ad hominems, when arguing the actions themselves doesn't work in your favor anymore. Don't worry about it, it's a common reaction.

My apologies though. I didn't realize my view obviously had to be so biased, coming from the media and all. You know far better of course, given your personal experience dealing with Mr. Trump on a regular basis. How could I have been so foolish. Tell me, what's he like? What have you seen him do that inspires your trust in him?

And on the media part, what exactly in the media do you feel has been misleading my view on him? Because honestly, usually it's based on video's of him, quite literally, saying and doing exactly what they're reporting. You know, kind of like you'd expect.
Post edited January 29, 2017 by Pheace
low rated
Whew! Thank god the travel ban hasn't impaired RWarehall's ability to make witty comebacks.
Post edited January 29, 2017 by tinyE
low rated
avatar
RWarehall: And you are telling me that is a proper reaction from the media?
avatar
Pheace: This is what the media does. It tries to find news, it analyzes, compares, and yes sensationalizes or overblows arguments on a regular basis.

Guess what? This is nothing new... It's been happening for ages and Trump isn't some special snowflake getting special treatment. He's throwing himself into the news day after day with his *own* actions, and often of his own volition (twitter). And guess what? His behavior isn't exactly popular. It's fine as some eccentric billionaire no one cares about. It's another matter entirely when you're *representing* a whole nation. Of course every step from a controversial candidate like him is getting scrutinized, and it's not going to stop, nor should it.

It's only proper if you are a one-sided extremist. How about you get over yourself asshole. We have some dickhead from the Netherlands who gets all his information about the U.S. from watching T.V. Makes you an uninformed loser. Seriously, go fuck yourself! All you idiots do is find everything to complain about. Trump is not destroying the world and the fact that all you hear about him comes through the media should give you a clue who is really at fault for all this partisanship.
avatar
Pheace: Ow here come the ad hominems, when arguing the actions themselves doesn't work in your favor anymore. Don't worry about it, it's a common reaction.

My apologies though. I didn't realize my view obviously had to be so biased, coming from the media and all. You know far better of course, given your personal experience dealing with Mr. Trump on a regular basis. How could I have been so foolish. Tell me, what's he like? What have you seen him do that inspires your trust in him?

And on the media part, what exactly in the media do you feel has been misleading my view on him? Because honestly, usually it's based on video's of him, quite literally, saying and doing exactly what they're reporting. You know, kind of like you'd expect.
You need to look at yourself in the fucking mirror idiot. When every goddamn word coming out of your mouth is Trump this or that, you are an extremist. I don't see you saying a single thing in his defense about anything nor saying anything at all about Democrats. It makes you one of those partisan assholes.

As to the media look at the slant of every fucking article! Like I said before which you "conveniently" ignored. Every goddamn media outlet put pictures from the back of the crowd as their headlines. What point do you think they were making? Do you really think they were trying to make useful news? Or were they making clickbait? Use your brain...

Just like the media has been going on for months parroting the Democrats about Trump's "racism". That he's "racist" for wanting to secure our southern border (which is ironic because the Mexican military is securing their own southern border with other latin american countries). That he is racist for wanting to be more careful with visas from 7 countries with strong ISIS presence. Given that ISIS has declared the U.S. as an enemy seems not to matter at all. Not even part of the story when you can throw out words like "racist" for views...

Just look at the reports of every time protesters trying to disrupt his speeches were removed. When it happened at a Trump rally, it was racist because they were from Black Lives Matter. When it's an overly vocal Trump supporter at a Hillary rally, it went unreported because that is expected of someone who is being unruly. If you are this dumb not to see the double-standards or read between the lines, no one can help you. If you can't figure out that most of the media outlets you are reading have an obvious partisan slant which should be abundantly clear from the unbalanced coverage. No one can help you.

Yet every damn word out of your mouth is how bad Trump is with no comment about the alternative Hillary at all who called all Trump supporters deplorable racists. When I see someone this one-sided, they are drinking the Kool-Aid of their party. It makes you just as bad as KingBradley and the like who has nothing good to say about Hillary and Democrats. Look in the mirror and that is exactly who you have become...
Post edited January 29, 2017 by RWarehall
avatar
tinyE: I was joking before. Now however I'm actually looking out at the water as I sit here and type thinking, "It's only 50 miles. I could do it."
avatar
vsr: Might be not a bad idea, considering shit that is about to happen (Hillary's/Barry's legacy lives! Yay!):
'Safe Zones': Trump's Idea Evokes Strong Memories of Hillary Clinton's Old Plan
American military base in northern part of Syria - USA invaded Syria, just like in dark medieval ages (Just to remind you, Russia is a strategical military ally of Syria and all it's bases are approved by Syrian government).
SU-24 bombs secret American military base in Syria - Americans called F-15 to protect them, but F-15 was late for the party (invaders were fragged).

It seems, there is no difference between Hillary-shmillary or something, USA will continue it's expansionist politics no matter what. Crimea returned to Russia thanks to stupid Barry's aggressive politics, due to need for a naval base in Black sea in a sight of increased military conflict (they seized Ukraine through a coup).
If Trump does some shit like trying to create "safe zones" in Syria (which everyone knows would merely be a pretext for regime change), it would indeed show US foreign policy is irredeemable.
Hopefully Trump won't do it, but given how obsessed with Iran some of his advisers seem to be, it's unfortunately quite possible.
avatar
ShadowAngel.207: Technically a good decision (Islam needs to die, who in their right mind would follow a "religion" where you pray to a war-mongering pedophile as prophet and where pedophilia, rape and other disgusting things are declared legal? Those subhumans need to be bombed), altough it's pathetic that Trump only banned those countries he has no business ties into....it's very double-faced and makes him look pathetic.
I have a mostly negative view of Islam, but your views are a bit too extreme for me...and I see no point in bombing Muslim countries, Western interventions there have been an unmitigated disaster.
But yes, I don't really see either what conceivable benefit the US or any other Western country gets from the immigration of Sunni Somalis, Yemenis or Sudanese...but a lot of trouble is guaranteed.
It's pretty lame though that Trump didn't include Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan in his ban, those countries are chief sponsors of Islamism. Bad optics that people from those countries are unaffected while secular Iranian emigres who aren't a threat now suffer from that ban.
Post edited January 29, 2017 by morolf
low rated
avatar
RWarehall: You need to look at yourself in the fucking mirror idiot. When every goddamn word coming out of your mouth is Trump this or that, you are an extremist. I don't see you saying a single thing in his defense about anything nor saying anything at all about Democrats. It makes you one of those partisan assholes.
Ow god... is this your personal version of "But Hillary..."?

Dude. The elections are over. We're talking about President Trump right now. There's only one president.
As to the media look at the slant of every fucking article! Like I said before which you "conveniently" ignored. Every goddamn media outlet put pictures from the back of the crowd as their headlines. What point do you think they were making? Do you really think they were trying to make useful news? Or were they making clickbait? Use your brain...
I seem to be missing your personal experiences? Did you forget to mention those? Where exactly are you getting *your* views on Trump? Surely you met him or something? *How* are you coming to these conclusions that what the media is saying of him *is* wrong somehow? Who's telling you this? Based on what?
That he is racist for wanting to be more careful with visas from 7 countries with strong ISIS presence. Given that ISIS has declared the U.S. as an enemy seems not to matter at all. Not even part of the story when you can throw out words like "racist" for views...
I guess it doesn't help that none of the major terrorist attacks attackers actually came from any of those 7 countries he just banned and that he ignored the ones that did. It also doesn't exactly sound great that Rudy Gulliani just told everyone Trump specifically asked him how to legally get a "Muslim Ban".
Yet every damn word out of your mouth is how bad Trump is with no comment about the alternative Hillary at all who called all Trump supporters deplorable racists.
Ow, nevermind, there it is.
low rated
He's not my President.
And just to add some figures:

Syrian refugees admitted to the U.S. since the start of the war there:
2011: 29
2012: 31
2013: 36
2014: 105
2015: 1,682
2016: >31,000

So I'm not really surprised that Trump might want to revisit some of these immigration visas given how Obama decided to open the flood gates in his final year.

I also find it funny how most every liberal seems to ignore the fact that it was Obama administration who secretly funded the rebels to start the civil war in Syria killing thousands and displacing millions of people in their poorly thought out plan of nation building. What a great humanitarian by fighting the Russian-supported Assad regime and pushing a Cold War narrative. Of course, his administration did a great job when they didn't anticipate how ISIS might join in the fighting. I'll leave it to your Google skills to see how much of the country is controlled by Assad, the Free Syrian Army (supported by U.S. and allies) and by ISIS. I think it becomes very clear that the war was a mistake and toppling Assad would just put Syria in the hands of ISIS.
avatar
vsr: Might be not a bad idea, considering shit that is about to happen (Hillary's/Barry's legacy lives! Yay!):
'Safe Zones': Trump's Idea Evokes Strong Memories of Hillary Clinton's Old Plan
American military base in northern part of Syria - USA invaded Syria, just like in dark medieval ages (Just to remind you, Russia is a strategical military ally of Syria and all it's bases are approved by Syrian government).
SU-24 bombs secret American military base in Syria - Americans called F-15 to protect them, but F-15 was late for the party (invaders were fragged).

It seems, there is no difference between Hillary-shmillary or something, USA will continue it's expansionist politics no matter what. Crimea returned to Russia thanks to stupid Barry's aggressive politics, due to need for a naval base in Black sea in a sight of increased military conflict (they seized Ukraine through a coup).
avatar
morolf: If Trump does some shit like trying to create "safe zones" in Syria (which everyone knows would merely be a pretext for regime change), it would indeed show US foreign policy is irredeemable.
Hopefully Trump won't do it, but given how obsessed with Iran some of his advisers seem to be, it's unfortunately quite possible.
I hope so too. I'm just worried that he constantly mentions how he loves Russia and wants to be friends with Russia. It's a kind of a political credit one expects to receive back with interest. And i doubt it Russia needs it from USA.

I already see headlines like this "I wanted to be friends with Russia! You all saw this! I suffered for this, bashed on every corner for my love for Russia! And Russians paid me THIS WAY! Scumbags! NOW THEY WILL PAY...". <nuclear launch detected>

I'm a bit over-exaggerating, but still... Probably expects to "Make Great Deals". So, yeah, we'll have to wait. Time will tell.
low rated
avatar
Pheace: I guess it doesn't help that none of the major terrorist attacks attackers actually came from any of those 7 countries he just banned and that he ignored the ones that did. It also doesn't exactly sound great that Rudy Gulliani just told everyone Trump specifically asked him how to legally get a "Muslim Ban".
Another leftist idiot quoting the media. Fuck you ignorant fool! Get your facts straight asshole. Look at these stupid liberal idiots.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/suspect-dead-after-ohio-state-university-car-knife-attack-n689076

But it's okay, he failed to actually kill anybody, so it's all good for you uninformed fools.

You don't even bother to fact check. Don't you find it convenient how the media "found a way" to leave this attack out with "careful wording". Nope, their news isn't slanted at all, just the facts, right? They are spoon feeding you liberal nutjobs and you are too stupid to see it.
Post edited January 29, 2017 by RWarehall
avatar
RWarehall: And just to add some figures:

Syrian refugees admitted to the U.S. since the start of the war there:
2011: 29
2012: 31
2013: 36
2014: 105
2015: 1,682
2016: >31,000

So I'm not really surprised that Trump might want to revisit some of these immigration visas given how Obama decided to open the flood gates in his final year.

I also find it funny how most every liberal seems to ignore the fact that it was Obama administration who secretly funded the rebels to start the civil war in Syria killing thousands and displacing millions of people in their poorly thought out plan of nation building. What a great humanitarian by fighting the Russian-supported Assad regime and pushing a Cold War narrative. Of course, his administration did a great job when they didn't anticipate how ISIS might join in the fighting. I'll leave it to your Google skills to see how much of the country is controlled by Assad, the Free Syrian Army (supported by U.S. and allies) and by ISIS. I think it becomes very clear that the war was a mistake and toppling Assad would just put Syria in the hands of ISIS.
I mostly agree with you about Syria. It's also telling that most of the refugees resettled by the Obama administration were Sunni Muslims:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/13210-syrian-refugees-admitted-year-through-october-675-99-are
Which is pretty strange, given that Sunni Muslims aren't the group most at risk in Syria/Iraq and there several majority Sunni countries in the immediate neighbourhood.