Touey
Well-known member
- Awards
- 0
It will seem a little awkward if the President of the United States is banned from entering Great Britain
A history book is your friendWhen he's elected and he handles the problem, Britain will be begging him to help fix their problems.
Not sure they can ban him because they don't like him, president or not. It's not like you need a visa to enter.It will seem a little awkward if the President of the United States is banned from entering Great Britain
[video=youtube;BQn1gJdVKi4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQn1gJdVKi4[/video]Not sure they can ban him because they don't like him, president or not. It's not like you need a visa to enter.
Handles problems by isolating an entire billion strong religion, then wanting to build up a huge wall to further isolate Mexico? Yes, the man us a genius!When he's elected and he handles the problem, Britain will be begging him to help fix their problems.
The daily mail is hardly a credible source - moreover the number of people leaving to fight for ISIS is pure guesswork. There are a few syrians, iraqis etc who live there who will undoubtedly return to fight against people oppressig their homeland - to day they are leaving to join ISIS ranks is unsubstantiatedhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2659237/More-Brits-signing-fight-jihadist-militants-Iraq-Syria-UK-Army-Reserve.html
More Brits join ISIS than the military reserves. Have fun over there.
The left does that daily but nobody seems to care about that.Calling all muslims ISIS or radicalists is like calling all white christian males mass murderers.
I think this binary approach is not going to solve anything, but rather it will continue to create a sense of fear and subsequently hate of a particular people/ religion. That's not the way forward. Not all muslims are terrorists, and not all white christians are mass murders. In the media all the time i see Muslims being grouped as one when ever one does an act of violence, but if a white man shoots up a school or centre, he is acting alone and is a psychoThe left does that daily but nobody seems to care about that.
How about the Telegraph? Since you have knowledge the British military doesn't, maybe you should call them and tell them you know it's only a handful of jihadis.The daily mail is hardly a credible source - moreover the number of people leaving to fight for ISIS is pure guesswork. There are a few syrians, iraqis etc who live there who will undoubtedly return to fight against people oppressig their homeland - to day they are leaving to join ISIS ranks is unsubstantiated
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9695107/Bigfoot-like-creature-spotted-in-Tunbridge-Wells.htmlHow about the Telegraph? Since you have knowledge the British military doesn't, maybe you should call them and tell them you know it's only a handful of jihadis.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10924976/Why-Britains-armed-forces-are-shrinking-by-the-day-and-does-it-really-matter.html
Which leading presidential democratic candidate said that?The left does that daily but nobody seems to care about that.
Guess you don't watch our media much considering every white christian male is a bigot that is born into white privilege these days. Didn't you know? Only black live matter.I think this binary approach is not going to solve anything, but rather it will continue to create a sense of fear and subsequently hate of a particular people/ religion. That's not the way forward. Not all muslims are terrorists, and not all white christians are mass murders. In the media all the time i see Muslims being grouped as one when ever one does an act of violence, but if a white man shoots up a school or centre, he is acting alone and is a psycho
You don't fight terrorism by breeding terror
When did Trump call all Muslims members of Isis or terrorists? I'm not pro-trump, I think he's a complete narcissist, but I like the media less.Which leading presidential democratic candidate said that?
Actually, many were quite xenophobic but a gun generally wins against a bow and arrow on top of the disease (mainly smallpox) that killed 90% of them. A gun wasn't even needed. It was the same pattern that followed Cortes and the fall of the Aztec empire.I had an interesting thought today. I hear the term xenophobic being thrown around a lot these days. In my personal opinion I have no problem with people not liking people for whatever reason they want to. I do have a problem with wanting to kill people because you simply do not like them. That being said I thought today that had the American Indian Nations been xenophobic they perhaps might not have lost their country. What I mean by this is sometimes being against those who are not like you may prove to be self preserving. Just a thought.
Right they are reporting government statistics, like I said, since you have inside info, you better call up the queen.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9695107/Bigfoot-like-creature-spotted-in-Tunbridge-Wells.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/howaboutthat/3447508/UFO-sightings-140-years-of-UFO-pictures.html
Do you seriously consider this kind of source to be credible? Seriously?
Maybe search up how many Americans have gone to join the ranks of ISIS? or how many Americans mass murder other Americans? cmon man, other sources state there is no way of knowing who has joined ISIS vs. Who has gone to fight for other causes, moreover these people are likely immigrants or families of immigrants who are from the region going back there to fight for their country.
toucheWhen did Trump call all Muslims members of Isis or terrorists? I'm not pro-trump, I think he's a complete narcissist, but I like the media less.
Had the Natives attacked the second they landed and the first ships sent this way never returned I still think the story would have played out differently at least for a while. Yes once Europeans landed, became semi-established it was too late. Had they been repelled the moment they set ashore who knows.Actually, many were quite xenophobic but a gun generally wins against a bow and arrow on top of the disease (mainly smallpox) that killed 90% of them. A gun wasn't even needed. It was the same pattern that followed Cortes and the fall of the Aztec empire.
Some did!Had the Natives attacked the second they landed and the first ships sent this way never returned I still think the story would have played out differently at least for a while. Yes once Europeans landed, became semi-established it was too late. Had they been repelled the moment they set ashore who knows.
It only would have delayed the inevitable. The British empire would eventually come with all their battleships and destroy and conquer. Then opium sales would go through the roof.Had the Natives attacked the second they landed and the first ships sent this way never returned I still think the story would have played out differently at least for a while. Yes once Europeans landed, became semi-established it was too late. Had they been repelled the moment they set ashore who knows.
Whats more important is the content. The daily mail seem's to be referencing government stats given by the Ministers which you can check on, but I do understand government NOT being a credible source as anyways.The daily mail is hardly a credible source - moreover the number of people leaving to fight for ISIS is pure guesswork. There are a few syrians, iraqis etc who live there who will undoubtedly return to fight against people oppressig their homeland - to day they are leaving to join ISIS ranks is unsubstantiated
He should take that fugitive Piers Morgan with him so he can face his crimes.It will seem a little awkward if the President of the United States is banned from entering Great Britain
You realise that other sources state there is no way of knowing how many people actually join the ranks of ISIS once they leave their home countiries, right?Right they are reporting government statistics, like I said, since you have inside info, you better call up the queen.
I dont deny the numbers to be true, but its where they end up I doubt. Some will join isis, but not all. You cant quantify that unless you can track them, and despite technology and movies, tracking someone in a country that wont cooperate is hard to doWhats more important is the content. The daily mail seem's to be referencing government stats given by the Ministers which you can check on, but I do understand government NOT being a credible source as anyways.
you wouldn't think it awkward for the President of the United States to be banned from going to Britain?He should take that fugitive Piers Morgan with him so he can face his crimes.
I dont think its awkward at all btw....I can see a general ban on Obama anyways, even ban him from traveling in the states but Id rather talk to my enemies as a personal preference as boycotts generally do more harm than good.
Wouldn't bother me at all, but I wouldnt do that myself.you wouldn't think it awkward for the President of the United States to be banned from going to Britain?
I see, just want to make sure you're still between the navigational beacons ax1Wouldn't bother me at all, but I wouldnt do that myself.
If he keeps up he's going to lock himself out of a lot of things including POTUS. You can't say whatever you want as President, even though his point on Muslim immigration I agree with. (Just needs to be more respectful about it)you wouldn't think it awkward for the President of the United States to be banned from going to Britain?
How exactly can you exclude an entire religion and be more repesctful about it?If he keeps up he's going to lock himself out of a lot of things including POTUS. You can't say whatever you want as President, even though his point on Muslim immigration I agree with. (Just needs to be more respectful about it)
Meanwhile Obama's administration talks climate change.
Cant argue that much. If I was him I would have just stuck to the stiff immigration policies rather than singling out Muslims although I do think the media got carried away at the same time.How exactly can you exclude an entire religion and be more repesctful about it?
I dont see the US banning Christians from Planned Parenthood or Colleges yet
I find it ironic that you would ban Muslims from entering, yet freely invade their own countries
Well that is actually a much better policy IMO. But to try shut down Mosques, and isolate Muslims (even American born ones) surely infringes on their right to religion.Cant argue that much. If I was him I would have just stuck to the stiff immigration policies rather than singling out Muslims although I do think the media got carried away at the same time.
Well for one he could've prefaced that it would be only temporary instead of saying it after the fact. I know I didn't catch that until watching the video twice. And you don't have to respond to every "elite" that tweets at you; cue Saudi princeHow exactly can you exclude an entire religion and be more repesctful about it?
I dont see the US banning Christians from Planned Parenthood or Colleges yet
I find it ironic that you would ban Muslims from entering, yet freely invade their own countries
That is true, I did catch that. But the Mosque thing is pretty permanent hahaWell for one he could've prefaced that it would be only temporary instead of saying it after the fact. I know I didn't catch that until watching the video twice. And you don't have to respond to every elite that tweets at you; cue Saudi prince
But god the looks he gives the audience when he says something "wild" make me fall on the floor laughing. :lmao:
:toofunny:That is true, I did catch that. But the Mosque thing is pretty permanent haha
As long as the Mosque gets proper due process I have no problem with that. Then again, Iranians "were terrorists" then Obama gives them billions of our tax dollars so sumtin aint right!http://www.mrconservative.com/2015/12/68029-breaking-texas-mosque-shut-down-for-funding-terrorism/
It's against the law to participate in terrorist activities, including sending funds. As well, US code says a President can prevent anyone not a citizen from entering the country for any reason if it's deemed that person is a threat to our interest.
If the US funds ISIS, how is that any worse than a mosque doing the same?http://www.mrconservative.com/2015/12/68029-breaking-texas-mosque-shut-down-for-funding-terrorism/
It's against the law to participate in terrorist activities, including sending funds. As well, US code says a President can prevent anyone not a citizen from entering the country for any reason if it's deemed that person is a threat to our interest.
ROLF!!!!If the US funds ISIS, how is that any worse than a mosque doing the same?
In saying that, just because one does it doesn't mean they all do. We had a sikh medical student here had the armed offenders squad called on him because he had headphone wires coming out of his bag.
The lady who phoned it in later denied that race/ religion had nothing to do with her concern. Lmao yeah, right
you think the US government directly funds ISIS, other than circuitously as trade is interwovenIf the US funds ISIS, how is that any worse than a mosque doing the same?
In saying that, just because one does it doesn't mean they all do. We had a sikh medical student here had the armed offenders squad called on him because he had headphone wires coming out of his bag.
The lady who phoned it in later denied that race/ religion had nothing to do with her concern. Lmao yeah, right
I know your not asking me but yeah the US government created ISIS. We have giving billions in dollars in arms to people over there to fight proxy wars and regime change in multiple countries in the middle east and north Africa. Now I dont know if the end result was supposed to be this, but the solution was to keep sending billions of dollars in weapons and nothing is being done to take out some of their million dollar money making resources such as bombing the oil fields.you think the US government directly funds ISIS, other than circuitously as trade is interwoven
yeah I think most folks understand all that, I thought perhaps Hayden was one of those who think Obama is intentionally trying to run the Country down. There are some who think that.I know your not asking me but yeah the US government created ISIS. We have giving billions in dollars in arms to people over there to fight proxy wars and regime change in multiple countries in the middle east and north Africa. Now I dont know if the end result was supposed to be this, but the solution was to keep sending billions of dollars in weapons and nothing is being done to take out some of their million dollar money making resources such as bombing the oil fields.
I dont know if he is really trying to bring the country down with intent, but I do know he wants to fundamentally change it from where it used to be as he said so himself. Now what he meant with that is a big debate, but I also do know for the fact he fundamentally has wiped the US Constitution and Bill of Rights with his bunghole.yeah I think most folks understand all that, I thought perhaps Hayden was one of those who think Obama is intentionally trying to run the Country down. There are some who think that.
or you could go the way of Pericles and say the citizens should demand legalization of the Constitution, fundamentally it's up to the people in a Republic until it's too lateI dont know if he is really trying to bring the country down with intent, but I do know he wants to fundamentally change it from where it used to be as he said so himself. Now what he meant with that is a big debate, but I also do know for the fact he fundamentally has wiped the US Constitution and Bill of Rights with his bunghole.