Theresa May will find herself as hated as Trump if she sacrifices our ethics for trade deals

[Proudpakistaniguy]

rational analysis of travel ban

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1425939744092031

[

 

[Nilgiri]

rational analysis of travel ban

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1425939744092031

[

Here's another zero Fareed did a "rational analysis" of:

We all know now how that turned out

 

[somebozo]

other than useless political blabber and media propaganda..there is nothing in trump to hate...!
this is the first time Media is finding itself under pressure as public is losing trust and it is desperately attempting to influence public opinions..

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

Here's another zero Fareed did a "rational analysis" of:

We all know now how that turned out

I dont know why you are trying hard to justify the bigotry and discriminatory policies of TRUMP. Love him or his Muslimophobic policies very much? share same common values?

 

[Flynn Swagmire]

I dont know why you are trying hard to justify the bigotry and discriminatory policies of TRUMP. Love him or his Muslimophobic policies very much? share same common values?

You still dont know???

 

[T-123456]

Where was all the hue and cry when Obama banned immigration/refugees from Iraq in the same temporary fashion (for 6 months IIRC) in 2011 (when they needed time to check proper vetting/ security process was in place)?

The current list of 7 countries didn't come out of thin air this time either, it again traces back to the Obama administration if you look it up.

Trump is basically doing exactly what he promised to do, put in bans till the US can be sure a stringent enough security process to admit refugees and immigrants from countries that have the most compromised internal vetting as the US govt now sees it.

Its not a muslim ban at all. Correlation/coincidence (muslim majority demographic with lack of domestic vetting/security) is not causation (muslim majority country ...or even all muslim people banned from US). After all how many countries can be listed right now which have muslim majorities but no such temporary ban is in place for? Much more than 7. These countries have been judged to have the pre-requisiting security apparatus regarding terrorism/extremism from filtering through to the US immigration services.

Its like saying internment of Japanese in the US during WW2 (again by a democrat president) was targeted against the Shinto religion, not the country.

The tone and the way to do things is important when you are the president of the US,the most powerful country in the world.
You are the centre of attention.
If he had brought in a ''softer'' way,people might not have protested so much.
The ban was even for ''Green Card'' holders and little kids,that doesnt go well with people.
Trump and his populist ways cause divide among Americans,he only makes enemies when he should be making friends in the country,just like my president did and is still doing.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

You still dont know???

I know that Indians have deep Love for TRUMP becaus eof his hate for Muslims but i thought @Nilgiri sane poster

Amber Rudd: Trump travel ban a 'propaganda opportunity' for Isis


Home secretary strenghtens UK criticim of move, saying it is divisive and wrong, but MPs question delay in airing concerns



Amber Rudd answers questions in front of the Commons home affairs committee on Tuesday. Photograph: PA


Alan Travis, Home affairs editor

Tuesday 31 January 2017 21.04 GMTLast modified on Tuesday 31 January 2017 21.13 GMT

The home secretary has strengthened Britain’s criticism of Donald Trump’s travel ban, branding it “a potential propaganda opportunity” for Islamic State , but has been criticised by MPs for taking several days to air her concern.

Giving evidence before the home affairs select committee, Amber Rudd agreed that most attacks in the US, Britain and Europe had been carried out by domestic terrorists in the most recent years and said that Isis would “use every opportunity” to radicalise people.

The home secretary said she had made clear in a phone call to the head of the US Department of Homeland Security, John Kelly, that she disagreed with the travel ban, and had told him of the difficulties it was causing UK citizens and the “response that was taking place in London and across the country”.

Rudd also said: “I think the important thing is for the government to state that we disagree with the ban and we have said it is divisive. It is wrong. I will continue to say that.”

But Rudd was challenged by the committee chair, Yvette Cooper, as to why she had not raised her wider criticisms of the travel ban with Kelly in the phone call. Cooper repeatedly pressed her on when she would make her concerns about its negative impact known to her US counterpart.

Theresa May has also come under criticism for not being vocal in criticising Trump’s ban on. On Monday, the prime minister made the briefest of responses to the domestic uproar over the US president’s attempt to ban travellers from seven Muslim-majority countries, insisting that the “UK takes a different approach”. The countries on Trump’s list are Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

At the committee, the home secretary also questioned the basis of the countries subject to the three-month travel ban to the US, saying the “sources of terrorism were not to be found in the places where the president was said to be looking for them”.

She said Britain would not take a similar approach on its refugee policy. Asked about the 120-day ban on all refugees while “extreme vetting” was introduced, Rudd agreed it would undermine international refugee protection in that fewer refugees would be accepted by the US as a result of the policy.

But she refused to add her voice to the criticism of the invitation of a state visit to Britain afforded Trump when Labour MP Chuka Umunna challenged her saying: “What message do you think it gives this country’s three million Muslims when you invite a known Islamophobe and honour him in the way you intend to?”

Rudd replied: “I think we can hold two things in our head, which is to say to the president of the US, ‘We find this policy divisive and wrong’, and still to respect the president of the United States and want to engage with him in the way we would engage with world leaders to try to promote UK’s interests.”

At the end of the committee hearing Cooper told the home secretary she had been unconvincing about when she would raise her wider criticisms with the Trump administration. Cooper added that Rudd should do so directly before a face to face meeting with her US opposite number.

The Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, said Rudd was right to point out how divisive and counterproductive the travel ban was but it should not have taken tens of thousands of people protesting in the streets to force the government to find its backbone.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-travel-ban-a-propaganda-opportunity-for-isis

Trump state visit plan 'very difficult' for Queen

Theresa May's decision to invite Donald Trump to a state visit has put the Queen in a "very difficult position", a former head of the Foreign Office says.

Lord Ricketts told the BBC the speed of the invitation had "surprised" him.

A petition calling for the state visit to be cancelled has gathered more than 1.6 million signatures. A rival pro-visit petition has more than 90,000.

On Monday, thousands of people joined UK protests against Mr Trump's travel ban on seven mainly Muslim countries.

The controversial immigration measures prompted an emergency debate in Parliament.

Lord Ricketts, who was permanent secretary at the Foreign Office from 2006 to 2010, said it was unprecedented for a US president to be invited for a state visit in their first year in the White House.

In a letter to the Times, he questioned whether Mr Trump was "specially deserving of this exceptional honour" and described the invitation as "premature".

"It would have been far wiser to wait to see what sort of president he would turn out to be before advising the Queen to invite him.

"Now the Queen is put in a very difficult position," he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38805196

 

[Nilgiri]

I dont know why you are trying hard to justify the bigotry and discriminatory policies of TRUMP. Love him or his Muslimophobic policies very much? share same common values?

Read the post above yours. Its from a fellow Muslim and Pakistani who has opened his eyes.

But of course you labelling me as Indian being the reason is the typical identity politics your side has to use now The last thing you have. I pity you for it.

 

[Flynn Swagmire]

I know that Indians have deep Love for TRUMP because of his hate for Muslims and i know @Nilgiri is an insane poster

Corrected for you...

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

Read the post above yours. Its from a fellow Muslim who has opened his eyes.

I dont feel the need to go through for irrelevant stuffs to justify the travel ban of TRUMP which no sensible person will agree with unless they are as racist and bigot as TRUMP

 

[Nilgiri]

The tone and the way to do things is important when you are the president of the US,the most powerful country in the world.
You are the centre of attention.
If he had brought in a ''softer'' way,people might not have protested so much.
The ban was even for ''Green Card'' holders and little kids,that doesnt go well with people.
Trump and his populist ways cause divide among Americans,he only makes enemies when he should be making friends in the country,just like my president did and is still doing.

If Trump had done it behind the scenes (like Obama did with the Iraq 2011 ban), he will just attract more vicious hate and protests later anyway.

He is just pre-empting now, might as well....this is early days and he wants to be seen as getting the job done by his core voter base (which is rallying behind him).

The focus is to fragment the opposition from the momentum given in Nov 8th (which was a complete 180 reversal from the landslide Hillary was supposed to win with).

Trump understands blitzkrieg in politics pretty well. He has studied how Andrew Jackson did it....just sit back and watch.

I dont feel the need to go through for irrelevant stuffs to justify the travel ban of TRUMP which no sensible person will agree with unless they are as racist and bigot as TRUMP

Then agree to disagree, dont interact with me for time being about trump and sit back and watch.

Its literally been a week and a bit. Return to discussing such 100 days from now and then one year from now etc.

When you rely on purely MSM and trump detractors to think for you, you are still going to be in a certain mindset. Give it some time to weather and gain some experience with cold hard fact that materialise in Trump administration. You have not even given him time for that, but rely on people that said conclusively that Trump will not win. Should you not be a bit wary of anything else they say? ....or continue to give them a huge benefit of the doubt?

 

[T-123456]

If Trump had done it behind the scenes (like Obama did with the Iraq 2011 ban), he will just attract more vicious hate and protests later anyway.

He is just pre-empting now, might as well....this is early days and he wants to be seen as getting the job done by his core voter base (which is rallying behind him).

The focus is to fragment the opposition from the momentum given in Nov 8th (which was a complete 180 reversal from the landslide Hillary was supposed to win with).

Trump understands blitzkrieg in politics pretty well. He has studied how Andrew Jackson did it....just sit back and watch.



Then agree to disagree, dont interact with me for time being about trump and sit back and watch.

Its literally been a week and a bit. Return to discussing such 100 days from now and then one year from now etc.

When you rely on purely MSM and trump detractors to think for you, you are still going to be in a certain mindset. Give it some time to weather and gain some experience with cold hard fact that materialise in Trump administration. You have not even given him time for that, but rely on people that said conclusively that Trump will not win. Should you not be a bit wary of anything else they say? ....or continue to give them a huge benefit of the doubt?

Ok,100 days then we talk again.

 

[Nilgiri]

Ok,100 days then we talk again.

May 1st, thats 100 days of trump administration. Mark it on calendar

We can set the next date at that day too. I think if we can do a structured analysis giving everyone enough time for events to actually happen and numbers to come out, we can have a more valid discussion.

 

[T-123456]

May 1st, thats 100 days of trump administration. Mark it on calendar

We can set the next date at that day too. I think if we can do a structured analysis giving everyone enough time for events to actually happen and numbers to come out, we can have a more valid discussion.

A good topic for May 1,''President Donald Trump,the first 100 days ''.

 

[Nilgiri]

A good topic for May 1,''President Donald Trump,the first 100 days ''.

Create it that day and tag me into it.