It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

You guys against the EO, what do you actually want?

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

He has gotten a lot done. A lot of really bad things.

Motivation is nothing unless it is informed by advanced morality. He has none.




posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

No. I did not say they are worthless.

I said that them paying fealty to a leader like Trump, makes them aligned with my sworn enemy. There is a big difference. I am sure their opinions are worth something to them, but all they are to me is an indicator of how many people in a country think that discrimination is a legitimate platform to run on. All they are to me, is an indicator of how many people would be prepared to abandon morality in favour of safety. Its not that they have no meaning, its just that they have no meaning to me outside of indicating where the danger lay.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:01 AM
link   
In reply to the OPs question not deflecting like the majority of you.
Let me tell you what really needs to be done. In the case of the US or for that matter any other country. If any person or persons (by that I mean families) that want to emigrate to another country they MUST apply at their country of choice embassy in their own country and it's there that they must be vetted.
There is a couple of reasons behind this. 1. they would not be on foreign soil if refused entry and suffer the cost of travel to that country and the cost of return travel. 2. The embassy authorities can refuse suspect individuals before they leave their own country thereby short cutting the "well I'm in your country now and claim asylum (which normally costs the host country millions in court cases in them trying to stay, then millions trying to get rid of them back from whence they came).
In other words, vet them in their own country first then the problem of refuse entry would not appear.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: EvillerBob

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner
...the attitudes of 97% of scientists...


Oh no, you di'un.


originally posted by: TrueBrit
...NINETY SEVEN PERCENT of scientists...


Oh no, you did!

97%, eh?

97% implies 100%, which implies a fixed number. Do you have access to a list of every single scientist who currently holds an opinion on "climate change"? Bit hard to have 97% of anything when you can't even quantify what 100% represents.

Do you have a link to the survey describing the methodology? Did they track down every single scientist in the world and ask them?

Could you also quantify "climate change"? I can't imagine any scientist denies that the climate changes. That's a very different question to whether "humans have any significant long-term impact on the climate in the ways alleged."

The last time people beat this particular horse, it turned out to be something stupid like "A pro-man-mad-climate-change journal, written for and mostly read by people who believe in man-made climate change, held a poll and discovered that 897% of their readers... believed in man-made climate change".

None of this is a reflection of what I may or may not believe about man-made climate change, so you don't need to waste perfectly good electrons trying to prove or disprove it unless it really means that much to you. My issue is with stupid claims such as "97% of..." when it's impossible that you asked everyone, and highly improbable that even a truly representative subgroup was chosen from which that number could be extrapolated.

Why improbable? Because enough people have screamed and shouted and waved their fists in the air, that people are genuinely scared to voice a real opinion on the matter. It says a lot when government officials start openly discussing legal action against those who are not repeating their preferred message.



www.cnsnews.com... news/article/melanie-hunter/ag-lynch-doj-has-discussed-whether-pursue-legal-action-against-climate

Attorney General Loretta Lynch acknowledged Wednesday that there have been discussions within the Department of Justice about possibly pursuing civil action against so-called climate change deniers.



Remember now.




One cannot be pro-liberty and pro-ban.


Except when 97% of some group 'agrees' with them.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

No. I did not say they are worthless.

I said that them paying fealty to a leader like Trump, makes them aligned with my sworn enemy. There is a big difference. I am sure their opinions are worth something to them, but all they are to me is an indicator of how many people in a country think that discrimination is a legitimate platform to run on. All they are to me, is an indicator of how many people would be prepared to abandon morality in favour of safety. Its not that they have no meaning, its just that they have no meaning to me outside of indicating where the danger lay.


I personally think Trump won for the same reason Brexit happened. People are fed up with the "old firm's" slow drudge towards globalism. People value their traditions. Governments exist SOLELY for the benfit of their constituents, not for meddling in other nations affairs or ceding control away to them.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

I see a direct parallel between what Trump is doing and how Hitler stirred the German populace up against the Jews, followed by deportations and arrests. We all know how that ended up.

"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: crayzeed
In reply to the OPs question not deflecting like the majority of you.
Let me tell you what really needs to be done. In the case of the US or for that matter any other country. If any person or persons (by that I mean families) that want to emigrate to another country they MUST apply at their country of choice embassy in their own country and it's there that they must be vetted.
There is a couple of reasons behind this. 1. they would not be on foreign soil if refused entry and suffer the cost of travel to that country and the cost of return travel. 2. The embassy authorities can refuse suspect individuals before they leave their own country thereby short cutting the "well I'm in your country now and claim asylum (which normally costs the host country millions in court cases in them trying to stay, then millions trying to get rid of them back from whence they came).
In other words, vet them in their own country first then the problem of refuse entry would not appear.




You never know, this might be part of the improvement plan! I won't hold my breath, but the point is, we don't know what will happen and so far, it's kind of a non-issue in my opinion.

Why all the anger and protests? I just don't get it. I think it really is just.... "cos Trump".



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

Oh, so his plan to blow up IS is not meddling?

Of course it is. Its meddling in the extreme, in a place which has already been meddled with. No one is asking him to sell off his country to other nations, but far from winding his neck in, he wants to go bombing nations from which he refuses to take refugees, that is, creating more refugees, and then refusing to help them, which is some serious BS and you know it. Its the same thing that GENUINE lefties have been complaining about from the Bush administration onward.
edit on 31-1-2017 by TrueBrit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Absolutely correct. We should allow for ISIS to remain, to solidify its position and to potentially grow all the while destroying historical and cultural sites, both discovered and undiscovered, and continue the murder and rape of the land and populace, all for the sake that we shouldn't meddle in their business.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

I see a direct parallel between what Trump is doing and how Hitler stirred the German populace up against the Jews, followed by deportations and arrests. We all know how that ended up.

"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"


I can entertain that...

But why!?!?

Apples and oranges.

Hitler and Germany were on the back foot. Their national pride had taken a huge blow after WW1 and coupled with their land being given away, they were, as a nation, in a very easily manipulated position. In order to get what he wanted, Hitler NEEDED to wage war, at the very least to retake the land that he felt was still German. Any boogeyman would have probably done, he just needed to rile the population up. The Jews were the boogeyman and the rest is history.

The USofA is already the most powerful nation on earth. If they wanted to wage war against all muslims, they could do it now (and have been doing it full tilt with Bush/Obama anyway)! They don't need to rile the population up. They don't need a boogeyman.

Also, unlike the jews in WW2, "%*!some!*%" muslims are giving some pretty convincing reasons to not trust them, all on their own with no help from Trump. Trump is reacting to a problem, for a better or for worse, but unlike Hitler, is not fabricating the problem for personal/national gain.

If anything, isn't Trump pushing for more non-interventionist policies?



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: DAVID64
So...one religious answer, saying Trump is the AntiChrist and one clearly emotional answer that doesn't really answer the question at all....Hmm.
Ever notice when you ask them what they really want, they have no clue?
Exactly. They're running on pure emotion not logic. You're not going to get a real answer out of them. They simply don't have one. that's why they can't be in power anymore. And it's going to be a long time before they ever get into power again because it's very clear now to anyone with a brain cell that they're not capable of being mature.

edit on 31-1-2017 by gernblan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: ksiezyc

Oh my giddy aunt...

There would be NO IS without US funding, through Saudi Arabia. This is a fact, not a debate point. Therefore, if the west stops funnelling money through Saudi Arabia to pay for their stupid bloody proxy army, that army WILL die off. The money dries up, the food dries up, the ammo runs out, and they get crushed by local forces. THAT is what WILL happen, if IS are denied the covert support they have had from the US by the backdoor. They were only ever agent provocateurs, similar to AQ, who were also agency assets.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

No... no... no.

You may want to dismiss what I wrote as "feels" and opinion, but it is not. What I posted happen to be facts. You may not like the way I present them, but that does not change what they are. A person has no right to state that they are pro-liberty and Freedom, unless they disagree with these measures. Simply put they are FACTUALLY mutually exclusive positions. One cannot be pro-liberty and pro-ban. One cannot be a lover of freedom, and at the same time want to restrict the freedom of others, no matter what their nation of origin. It IS a fundamental of liberty loving and freedom loving people, that they would rather die themselves than see infringements inflicted on others, and furthermore it is a fact that people who understand the concepts of liberty and freedom correctly, do not make distinctions between citizens and non-citizens.

And rather than just go off, heres my take on what ought to be happening instead of a travel ban...

Baldly, I want America to take responsibility for its foreign policy FAILURES over the last twenty years, starting with cancelling this travel ban to the point where things are as they were before it, then organising with aid groups to get persecuted persons out of danger zones, and yes, housed on US soil. I want my government in the UK to be doing that as well. I want the administration of both countries to cease either official or unofficial links and agreements with the Saudi government, to supply weapons, aid and money to terror groups in the Middle East, as I KNOW they have currently. I want both nations to cease any and all military action not solely limited to border defence (that includes any foreign deployment of either armed forces or intelligence assets, special forces, or any other asset). I want all troops, intelligence officers, private contractors in all fields, whether PMC or industrial/infrastructural, removed from the danger zones as well.

I want all funds normally allocated to continuing offensive missions against any targets in the Middle East, reallocated to allow for the care of refugees instead, because unlike EVERY OTHER APPROACH, these will slow down the creation of radicals much faster than bombings which make more recruits than they kill.
Yet you didn't mind Obama keeping Guantanamo Bay open?



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

OK...

The various pipeline orders.

I see these as crapping on the rights of the most abused people in all American history, those being the Native American people. Between the sacred ground being damaged, and the threat that these pipelines variously will pose to both Native Land, clean water, and the surrounding environment, they are a bad idea and always were. There are things that one should not do for profit, and screwing over Native Americans is one of those things.

The various anti-terror measures, including the travel bans.


The sacred lands that didn't exist until somebody got bent out of shape about a pipeline? Oh, and the river that already has a pipeline on it? Stop reading emotional fake news about the pipeline and get facts. There are laws on the books about native artifacts and heritage sites. Nobody has shown where any of those laws were broken or ignored. Bunch of people that don't live there going to protest something they don't know anything about because it got framed as violating native rights and jumped on by politicians trying to get 5 more minutes of press.

Maybe, instead of protesting a pipeline the locals don't even agree on, people could start protesting to have original contracts with natives honored. I suppose there's no .line grabbing narrative there though and now the election is over so nobody is looking for press coverage.

Then,

Travel ban... you forgot the temporary portion. Temporary ban. We've been bombing the crap out of other nations for years and killing innocent people... No mass hysteria from that. I guess that's just become expected of us.

Bomb sovereign nations, get Nobel Peace prize; ban immigration for a couple months, get protests and death threats. Wow the planet has gone mad.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: gernblan

Yes I minded him keeping it open, and I have said as much repeatedly, extensively, in discussions on the topic. The place should never have been bloody well opened!



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

Oh, so his plan to blow up IS is not meddling?

Of course it is. Its meddling in the extreme, in a place which has already been meddled with. No one is asking him to sell off his country to other nations, but far from winding his neck in, he wants to go bombing nations from which he refuses to take refugees, that is, creating more refugees, and then refusing to help them, which is some serious BS and you know it. Its the same thing that GENUINE lefties have been complaining about from the Bush administration onward.


ISIS isn't a nation though. It's a terrorist organisation spanning a number of countries. Should we ignore this problem?

They have no legitimate expectation of independance. They are, in there own words, waging a religious war against the west.

They are also the ones causing the most damage in their own respective countries.

How can you class this as meddling in another nations affairs?? Which nation. Which affairs? Be.ing children?

OK, so maybe there are some affairs the west should meddle in...



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

And again, I am against ALL the illegal behaviours of America, but Obama hiding his intentions behind a veneer of reasonableness, does NOT excuse an OVERT hate bomb campaign from Trump! Using the wrongdoing of a previous president to justify the wrongdoing of a current president does not make any damned sense! It was anti-liberal, evil, scummy, dictatorial nonsense before, and now it is BLATANTLY those things, instead of being hid away!

AND "PEOPLE" (horrible fascist dogs) STILL SUPPORT IT? Yes, the world HAS gone mad. Insanity is the only logical response to a world gone mad, so you WILL excuse me while I go a little bit potty too. The biggest problem your government has had with legitimacy in the last twenty years, stems largely from the fact that when it touted itself as left wing, it was involved in decidedly right wing actions. Now though? Its all in, its an absolute free for all, and it has to stop.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

I would propose asking the same question about securing the borders. If you are against building a wall, what would you propose be done to secure the borders? Something needs to be done right?





Enforce the current laws already in place.

If current laws where correctly enforced there would be no money to be made in illegally immigrating and so there would be no point in moving to the USA illegally.

Problem is LEO turn a blind eye to illegal immigrants and dont enforce the law, especially in santuary cities.


How do laws prevent illegals from walking across the border ???

Suggest your solution to ranchers and land owners along the border.



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Ksihkehe

And again, I am against ALL the illegal behaviours of America, but Obama hiding his intentions behind a veneer of reasonableness, does NOT excuse an OVERT hate bomb campaign from Trump! Using the wrongdoing of a previous president to justify the wrongdoing of a current president does not make any damned sense! It was anti-liberal, evil, scummy, dictatorial nonsense before, and now it is BLATANTLY those things, instead of being hid away!

AND "PEOPLE" (horrible fascist dogs) STILL SUPPORT IT? Yes, the world HAS gone mad. Insanity is the only logical response to a world gone mad, so you WILL excuse me while I go a little bit potty too. The biggest problem your government has had with legitimacy in the last twenty years, stems largely from the fact that when it touted itself as left wing, it was involved in decidedly right wing actions. Now though? Its all in, its an absolute free for all, and it has to stop.


Which right wing actions were those?? I'm just curious as to how you define "right-wing actions".



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

Great idea. NOT

Clocks ticking on the next attack. Let's see how long folks support no improvements in the vetting process



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join