Donald Trump Speech in Manchester, NH- Saint Anselm College (6-13-16)

a reply to: xuenchen

He also said keep out people who don't hold American values. So if you're not like us S.O.L.
He spoke of division and hate and intolerance. His usual schpeal.
Topped by his typical I don't know how the government works edicts.
Then of course we have the constant acknowledgment of the applause he got with the nodding his head and saying thank you.
When Hillary talks and they applauded she stays quiet assuming the idea is what is being acknowledged and applauded not her. But Trump he's sure the applause is for him . Thank you. Thank you. Be he never so humble...

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: crazyewok
Unlike most politicians, he cut the bullsh#t and speaks the truth. And he makes a valid points.

Are you sure he is "speaking the truth" and not just "saying what you want to hear"?

There's no difference.

And this is xenophobic to the extreme.

Explain how so.

Because typecasting an entire religion as a single (negative) description is pretty much the definition of xenophobia.

Again, how so?
Which "entire religion" was type-casted in a negative light?
I listened to his words and he said nothing of the sort.

You know what. I must apologize. I didn't realize what you were responding to and misunderstood what you were getting at. Trump supporters like to gang up on me with tons of posts whenever I post about him so I got a bit confused.

As far as your original intent. There is a BIG difference between him saying what you want to hear and the truth. Crazyewok already pointed out a few of the non-truths he said (like the shooter being born in Afghanistan when he was really born in NY). So clearly you were wrong there about him speaking the "truth".

a reply to: Nikola014

He is and it's not a lie.

a reply to: amicktd

Fair enough, I do.

He even made mention in the speech of a situation where a federal agency refused to act on information they had. Situations like this where one federal agency refuses to act, most likely for political reasons, will hopefully never happen again as a result of a Trump presidency.

He keeps talking about halting immigration here but that wouldn't have helped anything in this case. This guy was born here and has been living here already.

While I can understand his argument for immigration so no terrorists get past the boarder, that isn't what happened here.

He even pats himself on the back for saying to shut down the boarders after the shooting in LA a while back. But again that wouldn't have stopped this last shooting.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: crazyewok
Unlike most politicians, he cut the bullsh#t and speaks the truth. And he makes a valid points.

Are you sure he is "speaking the truth" and not just "saying what you want to hear"?

There's no difference.

And this is xenophobic to the extreme.

Explain how so.

Because typecasting an entire religion as a single (negative) description is pretty much the definition of xenophobia.

Again, how so?
Which "entire religion" was type-casted in a negative light?
I listened to his words and he said nothing of the sort.

You know what. I must apologize. I didn't realize what you were responding to and misunderstood what you were getting at. Trump supporters like to gang up on me with tons of posts whenever I post about him so I got a bit confused.

As far as your original intent. There is a BIG difference between him saying what you want to hear and the truth. Crazyewok already pointed out a few of the non-truths he said (like the shooter being born in Afghanistan when he was really born in NY). So clearly you were wrong there about him speaking the "truth".

Well, perhaps he did misspeak about a few things; I will acknowledge that.
That does not nullify that the vast majority of what he said was not incorrect.

originally posted by: TechniXcality

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: xuenchen

at least he's talking about raining whoop ass on these #ing terrorist scum, our nation was just attacked and Donald Trump is the only candidate talking about protecting our nation and going after our attackers, what a strange world we are in.

Dropping bombs alone wont solve #.

Never has never will.

A lot more action needs to be taken. Like cutting off the support the terrorists get from Saudi Arabia and UAE who fund the terrorists.

You know we've had this conversation; how many times over the years, brother? I can't disagree with you there, but I wrote this in another thread and these are the actions I would take.


we have the wrong framework here...

Radical Muslims have declared war on the west, they have done so in an ideological, political, and economic fashion, their words lead to real violence and death - on unprecedented global scales from genocides to mass cowardly attacks.

Mosques where they preach their hateful rhetoric are the head quarters, and ideological think tanks of these groups, they do not separate church from state therefor we should consider them one in the same, with that said, any speech that comes from radical Islam is an indicator of their presence and where they operate from, and we should arrest them and we should search their phones, and connections, and seize funds, and if we are unwilling to do this, then we are not treating this like a WAR and we will continue to see increasing attacks against the west.

That's the home front, now the mission goes further and involves a full scale occupation and a complete control of Saudi Arabia. That's the answer and I can't be anymore honest about it.

Star for this post, Tech. I share these sentiments.

a reply to: Bennyzilla

He even made mention in the speech of a situation where a federal agency refused to act on information they had. Situations like this where one federal agency refuses to act, most likely for political reasons, will hopefully never happen again as a result of a Trump presidency.

I am really interested in what Trump would change.

BTW can you tell us what information the federal agency had that they should have acted on?

A few years ago, Mateen also expressed support for both al-Qaida and Hezbollah, which is a bitter enemy of the Islamic State, Comey noted.

The FBI investigated Mateen for 10 months beginning in May 2013 over those remarks.

Comey said investigators introduced him to confidential sources, followed him and reviewed some of his communications, but Mateen claimed he made the remarks in anger because co-workers were teasing and discriminating against him because he was Muslim. The investigation was brought to a close.

The FBI also investigated him over his connection to the al-Nusra suicide bomber, but found no ties of any consequence, the FBI chief said.

As for whether the FBI should have done anything differently, "so far the honest answer is, 'I don't think so,'" Comey said.

link

a reply to: Grimpachi

"Nearly a year ago, the Senate Subcommittee asked President Obama's Departments of Justice, State and Homeland Security to provide the immigration history of all terrorists inside the United States.

These Departments refused to comply."

Just grabbed this from the speech transcript. If you're viewing it on the Trump page it's a little more than halfway scrolled down the page. Sorry I suck at linking.

I don't believe he was referencing this incident in Orlando specifically when talking about information that wasn't acted on.

PS - You could imagine a situation where the information about immigration might have ticked on somebody's radar since the shooters father seems to be at the very least sympathetic to ISIS's cause. This is pure speculation though so it doesn't hold much importance really.

He's reading this off teleprompters too. This isn't his speech, but he does interject some improv stuff now and then between what he's reading.

Not one of you would know how his and Hillary's speeches differed because none of you watched hers. Who the hell do you guys think your kidding.
Hillary spoke about going after ISIS by cutting off their finances forcing countries who support or allow citizens to support terror cells to cease funding them. She's had a plan in place for halting them in cyberspace. Cutting off access to the internet and stopping recruitment. She speaks of sanctions for countries supporting ISIS and she has no problem calling them radical Islam or radical extremists. She knows who the enemy is and isn't hung up on stupid labels. He makes the biggest deal about the stupidest things. She knows these people she knows the countries and she has the diplomatic ties we are going to need to defeat ISIS. Trump wants to segregate us from all of Muslim thereby cutting off information and access and making us the enemy of all the middle east. Smart.

a reply to: Bennyzilla

YEAH we will certainly need to verify that. He says a lot of things that aren't true. I think he's hired Alex Jones to do his research. LOL

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: paradoxious

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: crazyewok
Unlike most politicians, he cut the bullsh#t and speaks the truth. And he makes a valid points.

Are you sure he is "speaking the truth" and not just "saying what you want to hear"?

There's no difference.

And this is xenophobic to the extreme.

Explain how so.

Because typecasting an entire religion as a single (negative) description is pretty much the definition of xenophobia.

Again, how so?
Which "entire religion" was type-casted in a negative light?
I listened to his words and he said nothing of the sort.

You know what. I must apologize. I didn't realize what you were responding to and misunderstood what you were getting at. Trump supporters like to gang up on me with tons of posts whenever I post about him so I got a bit confused.

As far as your original intent. There is a BIG difference between him saying what you want to hear and the truth. Crazyewok already pointed out a few of the non-truths he said (like the shooter being born in Afghanistan when he was really born in NY). So clearly you were wrong there about him speaking the "truth".

Well, perhaps he did misspeak about a few things; I will acknowledge that.
That does not nullify that the vast majority of what he said was not incorrect.

Lol. You are basically just admitting to me that by overlooking Trump's minor gaffs as well as not letting those mistakes call into question the rest of his words you are care more about Trump saying what you want to hear versus him saying the truth. I know you are trying to spin it otherwise, but looking at it objectively you just covered for Trump lying to you.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: Krazysh0t

RADICAL ISLAM; big difference.

Ok. Explain how to tell them apart and how we legislate against one and not the other.

I guess it all depends on if you are interested in making the US a better safer, and stronger nation, or you are more concerned about appearing "more right" than others.

If you set aside your Ego, you might discuss this with others and decide that infiltrating Mosques with Muslims willing to assist with knowledge of radicalism is a super way of dealing with this inside our borders. That way, we don't have to invade other countries, we can monitor and arrest the bad guys that are here planning bad stuff.

Hell, we might just find that peaceful Muslims are just as interested as we are to erase the hatred that exists, along with the misplaced anger at which group is responsible. OH, but Trump did say something about working with Muslims, so it's likely a bad idea.

a reply to: Sillyolme

I think over the years, most people got this "hillary disease" whenever we hear her talk, we just get anxious and want to throw up.

Because, she's a goddamn criminal and pathological liar

a reply to: Krazysh0t

But that wouldn't be possible though would it???

Trump has already stated that "He's got the best words."

Didn't he also say he had the best brain or something too???

Anyway, how can someone with the best words flub up a speech???

a reply to: interupt42
Direct from the speech.

Our nation stands together in solidarity with the members of Orlando's LGBT Community.
This is a very dark moment in America’s history.
A radical Islamic terrorist targeted the nightclub not only because he wanted to kill Americans, but in order to execute gay and lesbian citizens because of their sexual orientation.
It is a strike at the heart and soul of who we are as a nation.
It is an assault on the ability of free people to live their lives, love who they want and express their identity.
It is an attack on the right of every single American to live in peace and safety in their own country.

Now this sounds to me like a complete embrace and tucking in as it were of the LGBT community into the fabric of American culture. Is he sounding rather liberal here? Is he indeed going to continue with this stand when it is no longer a viable tool to use for the rest of his plans? Will his followers take him seriously here and embrace the LGBT community? Only time will tell.

a reply to: Bennyzilla

His talk about immigration will not be of help with citizens born here almost 30 years ago and the things about his father I have read a lot of conflicting things.


Was his father sympathetic to ISIS or was it someone at the TV station that was sympathetic and the connection was he worked at the station.

Was it ISIS or was it al qaeda because those two groups are in conflict with each other.

I haven't read when his parents immigrated here from Afganistan, but it probably was during either the Reagan or Carter administration and at that point the US was arming what became al qaeda by means of the CIA to fight the Russians.

At that point and time wasn't the entire US sympathetic to al qaeda or what became al qaeda?

a reply to: network dude

I'm interested in someone actually answering that question versus typing a bunch of words yet failing to do that very thing.

a reply to: Sillyolme

But Hillary's big "answer" is to re-ban assault guns.

Everything she says is just cheap talk.

She has learned from the Master of BS Obama.