US Politics

[Jacquie]

And, of course, the countries which Trump has business dealings with are not on his ban list:

 

 

Edited January 29, 2017 by Jacquie

[The Unknown Poster]

34 minutes ago, Jacquie said:

And, of course, the countries which Trump has business dealings with are not on his ban list:

 

 

That's....shockingly blatant. 

[The Unknown Poster]

4 hours ago, Mark H. said:

I saw that message too - but it's not what was originally announced. 

They're making this up as they go. Ridiculous. 

[Mark H.]

I wonder - if Trump is getting bad advice or if he's just not listening to anyone? He's making changes at a rate that is unreasonable and unsustainable. The immigration ban, forcing Mexico to pay for his wall, while his VP is busy spouting off about abortion, etc. etc. etc. This all happened in their first week - they could at least give their country a little room to breathe. 

How many executive orders can he sign before they don't mean anything anymore?  

 

[Atomic]

I know we're all hating Trump right now but damn she lays the smackdown on these View harpies:

 

[bustamente]

I thought the first 100 days would be interesting looks like it only took less than 10

[The Unknown Poster]

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

I wonder - if Trump is getting bad advice or if he's just not listening to anyone? He's making changes at a rate that is unreasonable and unsustainable. The immigration ban, forcing Mexico to pay for his wall, while his VP is busy spouting off about abortion, etc. etc. etc. This all happened in their first week - they could at least give their country a little room to breathe. 

How many executive orders can he sign before they don't mean anything anymore?  

 

Guaranteed he's getting bad advice. But he's listening. Those far far right wing nuts and war hawks he's surrounded himself with are pulling the strings. Trump is so easy to manipulate because he's so thin skinned and insecure. He's just a puppet now. And when it comes to information you can bet he's being told what he wants to hear. 

[The Unknown Poster]

Their next plan is to screen cell phones and take contacts lists. 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/29/politics/donald-trump-immigrant-policy-social-media-contacts/index.html

[Rich]

What will this do to their tourism industry?

Go to the States with the possibility of being denied entry when you don't want them snooping in your cell phone. 

[The Unknown Poster]

11 minutes ago, Rich said:

What will this do to their tourism industry?

Go to the States with the possibility of being denied entry when you don't want them snooping in your cell phone. 

People will start buying burner phones just for travel. Which itself will lead to enhanced scrutiny. It's so stupid. 

[Jacquie]

And the latest idiotic move:

Quote

 

In one of three executive actions Saturday, President Trump reshuffled the National Security Council to include his chief strategist, Stephen Bannon, and limited the roles of the director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The memorandum makes the chief strategist a regular attendee of the principals committee, the Cabinet-level interagency forum that deals with policy issues affecting national security. For Bannon, the Washington outsider who ran the conservative website Breitbart News, it's another area of federal government in which he will have influence.

The Trump strategist is already considered a controversial choice for chief strategist because of Breitbart News's tendency to cater to white nationalists and previous comments he's made (i.e. "turn on the hate").

The memo also stated that the director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Join Chiefs of Staff will attend the principals committee meetings when issues related to their responsibilities are needed. According to The Hill, both officials have been regular attendees to principals committee meetings.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/01/29/national-security-council-stephen-bannon-presidential-memo/97210776/

[Mark F]

three times a day dose of depressing news spewing out of the Whitehouse.

Wonder if Trump will bring in his own security squad.

and Thanks for the updates u.p. and Jacquie.

 

Edited January 31, 2017 by Mark F
correct spelling, and add last sentence.

[kelownabomberfan]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444370/donald-trump-refugee-executive-order-no-muslim-ban-separating-fact-hysteria

[kelownabomberfan]

4 hours ago, Rich said:

What will this do to their tourism industry?

Go to the States with the possibility of being denied entry when you don't want them snooping in your cell phone. 

It won't stop me, they can snoop my phone all they want.

[Mark H.]

1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444370/donald-trump-refugee-executive-order-no-muslim-ban-separating-fact-hysteria

The article would be quite convincing if one were not aware of the facts it omits.

1. It cites Somalia as a source of terrorism via refugees - but Somalia is not even on the ban list

2. It does not mention countries like Turkey and Saudi Arabia being excluded from the list - or does the that art gallery incident in Turkey not matter?

3. Obama postponed refugee applications, not ALL VISAS, big difference

[Mark H.]

I want to share a story here - definitely related to current US politics:

We have a family of Sudanese refugees in Selkirk, MB. that were sponsored by a group of 20 local churches - my wife and I are members of the committee. They were vetted by the United Nations and arrived in July. Just in case it matters, they are Muslim. A widowed mother, her teenaged / young adult children, and one son who's married with one infant child. The had to leave a daughter and son behind in a U.N. refugee camp for complicated reasons.  The son (22) is now being forced out of the camp due to a lack of U.N. resources and him being an able-bodied male. However, if he leaves, Sudanese rebels will force him to fight for their cause, literally put a gun into his hand. One of the sons has dramatically improved his english, can even text coherently, and has started volunteering in the seniors program at the local library - a first step to building an employment resume.

Questions:

1. Is the U.N. vetting process not adequate enough for Trump?  What exactly is going to be improved in 90 days?

2. If that young man is indeed forced out of the camp against his will and winds up with the rebels - would he then be considered dangerous when he undergoes the vetting process? Is it really that simple?  Does he not deserve help?

Finally, this is why articles like the one posted above really bother me. They are mostly political: the democrats did this, the republicans did that, the left wishes this were not true, etc. etc. etc.  They attempt to fear monger while not actually addressing the issues, not really sharing the story of actual refugees.

[The Unknown Poster]

1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

It won't stop me, they can snoop my phone all they want.

What is the limit for you?  It's okay to snoop your phone. Okay to snoop your laptop? How about okay to strip search you?  Okay to body cavity search you?  Your kids?  

I got pulled into secondary on my way back from jamaica. I was probably the only person on the plane who didn't smoke week or something else. So it was silly. But they went through my phone. And realistically I wanted to refuse since I was returning To Canada. But it's better to comply. But it makes you feel dirty. And it's just the beginning. 

[The Unknown Poster]

 

[The Unknown Poster]

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

The article would be quite convincing if one were not aware of the facts it omits.

1. It cites Somalia as a source of terrorism via refugees - but Somalia is not even on the ban list

2. It does not mention countries like Turkey and Saudi Arabia being excluded from the list - or does the that art gallery incident in Turkey not matter?

3. Obama postponed refugee applications, not ALL VISAS, big difference

It's not a Muslim ban. It's just a ban on people who are predominantly Muslim. Trump is such a sleaze he can't even own his own racist policy. If he really believes it's necessary  then Own it. He's a coward 

[kelownabomberfan]

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

The article would be quite convincing if one were not aware of the facts it omits.

1. It cites Somalia as a source of terrorism via refugees - but Somalia is not even on the ban list

2. It does not mention countries like Turkey and Saudi Arabia being excluded from the list - or does the that art gallery incident in Turkey not matter?

3. Obama postponed refugee applications, not ALL VISAS, big difference

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021?utm_content=buffer40f82&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Good points Mark.  I do note that for some reason Obama did not seem to think Saudia Arabia was an issue either.

[kelownabomberfan]

36 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

 

That last tweet is fake.  

[Mark H.]

3 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021?utm_content=buffer40f82&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Good points Mark.  I do note that for some reason Obama did not seem to think Saudia Arabia was an issue either.

That's visa waiver restriction compared to a complete immigration ban.

[kelownabomberfan]

40 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

What is the limit for you?  It's okay to snoop your phone. Okay to snoop your laptop? How about okay to strip search you?  Okay to body cavity search you?  Your kids?  

I think I might draw the line at the strip search and body cavity.  That seems excessive just to go to Vegas, or at least, those kinds of activities can wait until AFTER I get to Vegas.

[kelownabomberfan]

31 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

That's visa waiver restriction compared to a complete immigration ban.

So this is a prime example then of what you are talking about, right Mark?  This really is a total load of crap.  I can't see this ban lasting, it's just not going to work. These bans will be reversed soon.  There is so legal basis for it, whatsover.

http://cnews.canoe.com/CNEWS/Canada/2017/01/29/22700549.html

[Rich]

7 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

So this is a prime example then of what you are talking about, right Mark?  This really is a total load of crap.  I can't see this ban lasting, it's just not going to work. These bans will be reversed soon.  There is so legal basis for it, whatsover.

http://cnews.canoe.com/CNEWS/Canada/2017/01/29/22700549.html

The 90 day ban was put in until they can review and change the current immigration procedures.    I'm very curious to see what changes they are going to make in those 90 days so that they feel they can lift the ban.   Hope I'm wrong, but have a feeling this is just the tip of the iceberg.