UK Government 'recognises' anger at Donald Trump comments

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

My opinion on events which have occurred during the Obama presidency, specifically foreign policy decisions and various allowances he appears to have made for the intelligence services and regarding the surveillance issue, are well known. It is also apparent to me that in every sphere in which the president attempted to make a positive difference to his nation, congress chucked him under the bus.

However, I am under no false impressions about Obama, or anyone who actually desires the amount of power he has. Another thing that is perfectly obvious from my post history is that I detest and distrust those who seek power, because they are asking to be corrupted by it. I believe that a system of distributed democracy, allowing for the people to chose not only their representatives, but the policies they will be looking to see enacted, is a much better method, and one which needs to be installed in every corner of the globe, so that the people of every nation become the power in it, in a very real, very immediate, and totally uncompromising fashion.

I also believe that trying to obfuscate the significant and obvious flaws of Trump, by throwing light on the already illuminated failings of the current president, rather fails to address anything significant.

a reply to: MagnaCarta2015

I think that perception is engineered.

There are people in our nation who mobilise to get things done for the good of us all, but their efforts are long term, not particularly "sexy" and involve a significant degree of intellectual capacity, to immediately see the benefit of.

In short, they are not headline friendly, and due to being largely citizen lead, not particularly well advertised, due to the fantastical cost of getting a message out over the big carriers, like the national press, the television news media, and so on and so forth. Despite the YouTube generation coming up to take a whack at the whole distribution of information game, the fact is that a great many voting age people still get the majority of their news through traditional outlets, rather than newer ones, like the internet based sources we are familiar with. While that remains true, the vast majority of what you hear about on the wire, will be paid for by someone you should not trust, and influenced by bias.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: neformore

I, for one, am glad that someone, officially, said SOMETHING about this looney toon.

No offense Reldra but if you think a proven habitual liar and thief like Hillary Clinton or a economics dunce like colonel Sanders is better FOR THIS COUNTRY than Donald Trump then you are the looney toon!
And that's official!

a reply to: fartsmeller46

You want a bloviating hatemonger as President? Seriously???

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: fartsmeller46

You want a bloviating hatemonger as President? Seriously???

Come on we are talking the USA here....do we really need to ask that?

a reply to: nonspecific

No...I used fairly specific words. I'm fairly certain that any able-minded individual can discern my intent and meaning.

I think a lot of you need to take a harder look at what he actually said.

originally posted by: crazyewok
Seeing as its our border and can we can allow who we like in or ban who we like I would think you trump supporters would be all for that? Seeing as trump is all for that.

Or is it only good when the USA does and bad if other countrys do it to you?

I think every Nation has the right to enforce their borders, but you fools are banning Trump & Savage for their words, yet allowing one eyed extremists to spew things 100 times worse than either of them have ever said.

= a mental illness pal. Figure it out if you can. Its absolutely ridiculous, You guys need to fix your brains over there wok. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: TrueBrit

Interesting...I hadn't considered that but it makes sense.

originally posted by: SheopleNation

originally posted by: crazyewok
Seeing as its our border and can we can allow who we like in or ban who we like I would think you trump supporters would be all for that? Seeing as trump is all for that.

Or is it only good when the USA does and bad if other countrys do it to you?

I think every Nation has the right to enforce their borders, but you fools are banning Trump & Savage for their words, yet allowing one eyed extremists to spew things 100 times worse than either of them have ever said.

= a mental illness pal. Figure it out if you can. Its absolutely ridiculous, You guys need to fix your brains over there wok. ~$heopleNation

Since we kicked his blairness out of office we have been refusing entry to muslim hate preachers.
We have even extradited a few.

Few problems :
A number are British citizen. As citizens they have rights (trumps not a UK citizen ).

Many slip through as we dont know they are hate speakers until they arrive.

Once here within our borders again certain rights apply. (Trump is not in the UK at this time).

Lastly there are usefull. The hate speakers are all bluster and no action. But they attract thereal jihadis
Like flys to a turd. Which makes the hate preachers a great unknowing honey pot. Mi5 just have to tap there phones and emails and put them under 24/7 surveillance and we then get a whole list of suspects we wouldn't have got otherwise.

a reply to: crazyewok

Well how you guys screen questionable individuals is really your own business at the end of the day, but what I am saying is that neither Trump or Savage are questionable.

Neither of them pose any danger whatsoever to your Country, and I believe that you know that already because you're not stupid.

I believe that its really just not worth pissing millions of your allies off. Its actually very irrational. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: SheopleNation

Trump if he visited the Uk would use up valuble police and security service time and money to protect his sorry arse.

We spend that money and we would get nothing in return. Trumps adds nothing of value.

If Trump or the US taxpayer was willing to cover the police and security cost on his visit then sure let him come.
But folk up.

As for pussing off millions of allies? Why should they be pissed? Our border our rules. Americans dont get automatic right of entry, get over it, we are just doing want they want the USA to do. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

originally posted by: SheopleNation
I think every Nation has the right to enforce their borders, but you fools are banning Trump & Savage for their words, yet allowing one eyed extremists to spew things 100 times worse than either of them have ever said.

I wonder - why didn't you read my opening post?

I think you should.

a reply to: neformore

No reason to assume that I did not read it my friend, I always read the OP of any thread here on ATS that I post in, as well as those that I just read over. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: crazyewok

But the reason is irrational wok, and don't give me that cost of security nonsense, Trump does not have some high priced security here in the USA like you're talking about, which according to you here we are full of gun loving maniacs bro.

So in a sense, why would you need to spend so much to protect Trump in such a peaceful nation that is so gun free ? So you see, it is complete nonsense and you know it be true my friend. ~$heopleNation

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: awareness10
So, let me get this straight... Donald T. can't enter Britain because he's anti muslim but Bush and all the other Murdering Warmongers can? Hello ... Logic????

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Bush will not travel to Europe out of fear of being arrested and charged with war crimes.

Yes i too have heard that, but seeing as the World leaders all get together atleast once a year and have drinks laugh and make merry, i'm pretty sure that they've got ways around that to allow him and others entrance into these countries unbeknownst to the People of the World. Warmongers are really sneaky that way.

a reply to: SheopleNation

Ah... I see.

Its just that you assume Trump has been banned. He hasn't.

He is very close to it though.

Trump 2016! Suck it.

originally posted by: Tempter
Trump 2016! Suck it.

Sure vote him in.

Doesnt mean we have to let him in our borders.

originally posted by: SheopleNation
a reply to: crazyewok

But the reason is irrational wok, and don't give me that cost of security nonsense, Trump does not have some high priced security here in the USA like you're talking about, which according to you here we are full of gun loving maniacs bro.

So in a sense, why would you need to spend so much to protect Trump in such a peaceful nation that is so gun free ? So you see, it is complete nonsense and you know it be true my friend. ~$heopleNation

The fact you tried turning this in to a gun debate means you lost me,