The Political Discussion Thread

[Gatefan1976]

You won't get an answer for all the things Trump said or did against Obama, and he's the one that started the birther nonsense. Another thing you won't get an explanation for.

Naw, don't you know, that was Hillary.............

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

okay, who *broke* the forum last night..?
I'm guessing that down time was just regular update maintenance??


Anywho.. back to politically related news link discussion--



Daily Mail is MailOnline. It's a legit news -- copyrighted and "published by Associated Newspapers Ltd". Most info is UK regionally based news. However, they post a bunch of raunchy *celebrity*--famous people related garbage on their sidebars almost every day. That's their biggest downfall, IMHO. Makes viewing the more news-type of articles very distracting.

Conservative minds in the USA view such sidebar linked material differently than the UK and EU/Australia. Here, such items are more on the verbotten side. There, not so much, because they hold different standards to such type of snapshots of "famous people" photos -- which is obviously used to *attract* their product more.

It's for that very questionable *standards* reason on why I usually try to avoid using the DailyMail as a source for news info, because of their distracting sidebar and other endless links around the article. Such *tabloid* type of famous people items -- tends to remove the actual article from being the center of focus, as an end product result, IMO.

Unfortunately, if the other articles (which were USA based) did their own research and/or interviews, then I wouldn't have had to resort to tracing everything back to the original article -- DailyMail link, instead, which is where the info on Valerie Jarrett (moving into the Obama's rental home) came from.




Thanks for the additional post note.
Except I sort of disagree with the "Has a strong conservative bias" because it counteracts against the more loose and liberal *raunchy* famous people blurb articles in the sidebar links.

Wikipedia is no longer accepting the Daily Mail as a legitimate source. That should tell you something about how reliable it is.

[Gatefan1976]

Wikipedia is no longer accepting the Daily Mail as a legitimate source. That should tell you something about how reliable it is.

[dipsofjazz]

Except I sort of disagree with the "Has a strong conservative bias" because it counteracts against the more loose and liberal *raunchy* famous people blurb articles in the sidebar links.

The Daily Mail is a right-wing rag that makes up stories.

All our tabloids have a mixture of news and celebrity stuff and, of course, football. If you think they are raunchy, you should have seen them a few years ago when they all had topless models posing on page three.

[Annoyed]

It seems to me the Geneva Conventions and the Human Rights Declaration are as unknown to you as they are to your president....

Funny, I never knew those documents required a nation to have open borders, allowing uncontrolled immigration into the country.
Of course, your country has no restrictions on immigration, right? Anyone who wants to come in is welcome?

[Falcon Horus]

You know, the presence of porn is often an indicator of an illegitimate website...

But who would pass up on free porn...

** and that's when GW decided to go down, so I guess that answers that question.

What response do you get from the WH?
A week or 2 later, they condemn them because it becomes politically expedient to talk about them, not because they give a hard turd about them.

Let's also not forget the reaction to the toppling of the headstones on the Jewish cemetries.

How about because you are willing to let any attack that does not involve white people just slide?

White people can't be terrorists. They are never terrorists.
When a news report talks about an attacker, you just know they are white people.

Terrorists is only for brown people (and Muslims).

And what exactly is wrong with taking money from a program that assists people who are in this country illegally and using it to aid victims of crimes committed by people who are in the country illegally?

What about victims of crimes committed by Americans? What do they get?

If interested enough, two articles for you to read:

Overview of Immigrant Eligibility for Federal Programs
Why is it that Illegal Aliens Get Free Food Stamps, Health Insurance and Pay No Taxes?

And one from 2012
'Illegal Alien Facts' vs. the Truth-O-Meter

Why on Earth do we even have programs to help those who are here illegally to begin with?

It's this annoying little thing called "Basic human rights", as noted down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Undocumented Non-citizen: A person who is in a country in which he or she is not a citizen, without any legal right or permission to be present, and can be removed by that country. (Other terms have been used, including “illegal alien,” “undocumented worker,” “undocumented migrant.”)

The International Covenant on the Civil and Political Rights Article 2.1 recognizes certain civil and political rights in “all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction”, including illegal aliens. It states further that everyone can exercise all human rights “without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, birth or other status.”

Article 2.1:
1. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

I'm guessing that down time was just regular update maintenance?

I wouldn't call it regular. GW was down and people were frantic.

GW addicts unite!

Daily Mail is MailOnline. It's a legit news -- copyrighted and "published by Associated Newspapers Ltd". Most info is UK regionally based news. However, they post a bunch of raunchy *celebrity*--famous people related garbage on their sidebars almost every day. That's their biggest downfall, IMHO. Makes viewing the more news-type of articles very distracting.

DailyMail is not legit.

Bias aside, they post false articles, rarely fact check their claims and are simply a trashy tabloid magazine living off clickbait (and porn apparently).

...DailyMail link, instead, which is where the info on Valerie Jarrett (moving into the Obama's rental home) came from.

And as I linked to websites that do fact check, you'd know the article DailyMail posted is not correct, nor is it even remotely true.

Except I sort of disagree with the "Has a strong conservative bias" because it counteracts against the more loose and liberal *raunchy* famous people blurb articles in the sidebar links.

Bias is about how the articles are written (fact checked or not).
The sidebar adds have little to do with bias or how a newspaper wants to be seen.

I don't know how banner advertising works exactly (other than that it annoys the hell out of me and why I use an add-block) so I looked it:

What is 'Banner Advertising'
Banner advertising is a rectangular graphic display that stretches across the top or bottom of a website or down the right or left sidebar. The former type of banner advertisement is called a leaderboard, while the latter is called a skyscraper. Banner ads are image-based rather than text-based and are a popular form of website advertising. The purpose of banner advertising is to promote a brand and/or to get visitors from the host website to go to the advertiser's website.

'Banner Advertising'
The host is paid for the banner advertisement through one of three methods: cost per impression (payment for every website visitor who sees the ad), cost per click (payment for every website visitor who clicks on the ad and visits the advertiser's website) or cost per action (payment for every website visitor who clicks on the ad, goes to the advertiser's website and completes a task such as filling out a form or making a purchase).

I do know about a lot of companies which have banned Breitbart for example from their advertising packages so that their adds are no longer shown on the Breitbart webpage, which means less income from adds for the latter.

Let the mass deportations begin, or should an illegal immigrant like you get a pass "just because" your parents or grandparents (or further back) broke the law?

According to Ben Carson, slaves were immigrants to. Like they chose to go to America.

Sorry about the blood pressure issue. Many of your posting rants sound like someone I have to work with...

For the record, I take offence you calling my posts rants. If I were to rant, you'd know... and I would too, cause I'd have moderators breathing down my virtual neck.

I make it a point, to investigate, fact check and be thorough before I post. I consult different sources, compare articles, dig deep (and waste a lot of time on that information-seeking sometimes, only to have the people who I post it for not even caring I do).

My university professors hammered it down quite well --> one piece of evidence does not make a case. Or in our case, one piece of archaeological evidence is equal to no archaeological evidence. And when all you have is one piece, you're down to speculation. Still don't know how the Romans used the dodecahedron, which was uncovered in Tongeren some years ago.

Could have been mathematical, but who knows... They did, obviously, but it's hard to find a ancient Roman these days who can tell us.

...sometimes shaking my head in near --omg-- disbelief.

Why is that?

Is it because I make sense?

Sadly, it seems we may rarely ever see or speak on the same wavelength for POV, but that's the challenge of most conversations.

It's like we're on two different planes of existence, or alternate universes.

[Falcon Horus]

"If you are doing something or saying something that is meant to overthrow the established authority in your country, you are liable to be charged with sedition."

Isn't that what Steve Bannon does?
The shadow President of the USA.

And didn't trump acknowledge those as BEING hate crimes/ How often did Obama, or Hillary speak out to condemn the assaults on trump supporters (STILL GOING ON), during the election run up or prior to inauguration. NEVER.

Actual US law definition of a hate crime:

(a) In General
(1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person—

(A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and

(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if—
(i) death results from the offense; or
(ii) the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

(2) Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.—

(A)In general.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person—

(i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and
(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if—

(I) death results from the offense; or
(II) the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

(B)Circumstances described.—For purposes of subparagraph (A), the circumstances described in this subparagraph are that—

(i) the conduct described in subparagraph (A) occurs during the course of, or as the result of, the travel of the defendant or the victim—

(I) across a State line or national border; or
(II) using a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce;

(ii) the defendant uses a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A);

(iii) in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A), the defendant employs a firearm, dangerous weapon, explosive or incendiary device, or other weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce; or

(iv) the conduct described in subparagraph (A)—

(I) interferes with commercial or other economic activity in which the victim is engaged at the time of the conduct; or
(II) otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce.

(3)Offenses occurring in the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the united states.—
Whoever, within the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, engages in conduct described in paragraph (1) or in paragraph (2)(A) (without regard to whether that conduct occurred in a circumstance described in paragraph (2)(B)) shall be subject to the same penalties as prescribed in those paragraphs.

(4)Guidelines.—
All prosecutions conducted by the United States under this section shall be undertaken pursuant to guidelines issued by the Attorney General, or the designee of the Attorney General, to be included in the United States Attorneys’ Manual that shall establish neutral and objective criteria for determining whether a crime was committed because of the actual or perceived status of any person.

(b) Certification Requirement
(1)In general.—No prosecution of any offense described in this subsection may be undertaken by the United States, except under the certification in writing of the Attorney General, or a designee, that—

(A) the State does not have jurisdiction;
(B) the State has requested that the Federal Government assume jurisdiction;
(C) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence; or
(D) a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice.

(2)Rule of construction.—
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the authority of Federal officers, or a Federal grand jury, to investigate possible violations of this section.

(c)Definitions
In this section—
(1) the term “bodily injury” has the meaning given such term in section 1365(h)(4) of this title, but does not include solely emotional or psychological harm to the victim;
(2) the term “explosive or incendiary device” has the meaning given such term in section 232 of this title;
(3) the term “firearm” has the meaning given such term in section 921(a) of this title;
(4) the term “gender identity” means actual or perceived gender-related characteristics; and
(5) the term “State” includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and any other territory or possession of the United States.

(d) Statute of Limitations
(1)Offenses not resulting in death.—
Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense under this section unless the indictment for such offense is found, or the information for such offense is instituted, not later than 7 years after the date on which the offense was committed.

(2)Death resulting offenses.—
An indictment or information alleging that an offense under this section resulted in death may be found or instituted at any time without limitation.

Hate Crime Laws by the United States of America Department of Justice

WHy are we even using tax payer monies to FUND and help illegal aliens stay in the country rather than using it to help the hundreds of thousands of AMERICAN CITIZENS who are homeless, jobless etc.. OR using it to help out victims OF those illegal aliens criminal acts (such as that one gal recently raped by one of her family members, an illegal alien who was out on bail awaiting his deportation hearing).

-- you're rejoiced the ACA is going to be repealed, which does just that. Help those who can't afford it. Or always complaining your tax dollars are going to education (which means properly educated workers).

*snort*

...but rarely do you answer on the level of people such as FH.

I'm just thorough.

And also, apparently I rant. *shrug*

It seems to me the Geneva Conventions and the Human Rights Declaration are as unknown to you as they are to your president....

The US did not ratify parts of the Geneva Convention -- the parts (Protections I & II) where they have to treat prisoners of war with respect to their basic human rights. (see Guantanamo)

And as far as human rights go... the offical Human Rights report of 2016 for the USA by Human Rights Watch.

Wikipedia is no longer accepting the Daily Mail as a legitimate source. That should tell you something about how reliable it is.

Now that's saying something.

...you should have seen them a few years ago when they all had topless models posing on page three.

They were quite popular, I hear.

Funny, I never knew those documents required a nation to have open borders, allowing uncontrolled immigration into the country.

No, but they do lay out the basic human rights your country ratified as part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Of course, your country has no restrictions on immigration, right? Anyone who wants to come in is welcome?

I believe, Gatecat is Austrian so here you go:

Immigration to Austria

Austria is also unique within the EU by being the only EU member state to currently offer a legal Economic Citizenship program, allowing a direct path to citizenship with no residency requirements for individuals and their families , where these are able to make a contribution of several million euros to the Austrian government and it's people.

Austria searches freight trains in new frontline on illegal migration

[pscard]

Here's a little satire to help lighten the mood:

Trump Orders All White House Phones Covered in Tin Foil

[Annoyed]

If interested enough, two articles for you to read:

Overview of Immigrant Eligibility for Federal Programs
Why is it that Illegal Aliens Get Free Food Stamps, Health Insurance and Pay No Taxes?

And one from 2012
'Illegal Alien Facts' vs. the Truth-O-Meter



It's this annoying little thing called "Basic human rights", as noted down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

If those people are "entitled" to anything, that entitlement should be fulfilled by their home country.
As far as I'm concerned, the only government "entitlement" someone who has come into the country illegally, or overstayed a visa/etc. is the right to an immediate deportation. Period.

Why on Earth should any country have to provide benefits to those that sneak into the country? There is no possible logically justifiable reason.

Oh, and a "National Immigration Law Center" website is a source I would pay attention to? I didn't even bother to look at the others.

[SoulReaver]

They are the -wrong- humans my feline friend, only the "right" humans count.

yet this is exactly what got the LSOS elected

how about the media focus on how his policies are negatively affecting & will affect the majority of americans instead (especially those who voted for him) and maybe there's a chance he'll be ousted in 4 years assuming the elections aren't rigged of course
cause for now it looks an awful lot like the media are working for him - while pretending to work against him - just like they did during elections

[Gatecat]

They are the -wrong- humans my feline friend, only the "right" humans count.

The US did not ratify parts of the Geneva Convention -- the parts (Protections I & II) where they have to treat prisoners of war with respect to their basic human rights. (see Guantanamo)

And as far as human rights go... the offical Human Rights report of 2016 for the USA by Human Rights Watch.

I know, I was being sarcastic... although I don't acknowledge the US as a civilised western country anymore...

Funny, I never knew those documents required a nation to have open borders, allowing uncontrolled immigration into the country.
Of course, your country has no restrictions on immigration, right? Anyone who wants to come in is welcome?

No, but they do lay out the basic human rights your country ratified as part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

What FH said.

I believe, Gatecat is Austrian so here you go:

Austria is also unique within the EU by being the only EU member state to currently offer a legal Economic Citizenship program, allowing a direct path to citizenship with no residency requirements for individuals and their families , where these are able to make a contribution of several million euros to the Austrian government and it's people.

Immigration to Austria

Basicly yes, I wouldn't say there are NO requirements, though. There are a few actually:

http://www.migration.gv.at/en/welcome/?no_cache=1

https://www.help.gv.at/Portal.Node/h...te.120224.html

Austria searches freight trains in new frontline on illegal migration

Every refugee can apply for asylum either at any police station or police officer in Austria. When they have applied they are automaticly protected from deportion as long as the asylum process is running.

http://www.unhcr.at/english/austrian...gislation.html

http://www.refugee-guide.at/en/ablauf.html
(Note: This brochure is especially for refugees who's first language is not English, hence the simple wording and pictures. )

[Annoyed]

Every refugee can apply for asylum either at any police station or police officer in Austria. When they have applied they are automaticly protected from deportion as long as the asylum process is running.

Asylum/Refugee is a bit different, but that's beside the point. What do you do with those who sneak into your country without following whatever legal process there is? Just sneak in by whatever means they can. I notice you didn't address that.

[garhkal]

Show me your birth certificate you rag headed Muslim ******
Not enough for you?
How about you look at his own twitter feed.
Are you ****ing kidding me right now??

Fare enough you proved your point there..

Is it a crime?
Yes.
Is it a major crime?
No.
Do you destroy a family because daddy got caught speeding in his car?

Speeding no. Too many speeding tickets, to where daddy goes to jail, yes. Same with grand larcany, or other crimes that end up putting daddy in jail.
And as i said before, there are also times where if say daddy buys kiddys stuff from his ill gotten gains, when the cops catch up with dad, those items get confiscated..

By your logic, you should kick daddy out, and he can come back into the country in 10 years.

Yes he should get booted. As for the kids, how many times have i said, SINCE THE RUling on 'birthright citizenship is based on a FLAWED reading of the 14th, it shouldn't be granting automatic citizenship to the kids born here, just cause illegal alien mommy was able to cross the border before she dropped out the kid in one of our hospitals.. So the kid should also go..
Come back when he (or she) reaches 18.

Have you sped? have you walked across the red light?

Yes i have, and every time i got caught, and ticketed i PAID IT OFF, no challenges, no whining.. No demonstrating that i am unfairly being targeted etc...

GET OUT OF THE COUNTRY YOU CRIMINAL!!!

Since i am a citizen by blood, why would i leave just cause i broke the law?

Are you -seriously- comparing what amounts to a bar brawl to going home, getting your gun and shooting people???

To those who had their heads stomped in, and such i wouldn't think they would liken what happened to a mere bar brawl..

Obama commented on -every- terrorist style attack EVERY DAMN ONE OF THEM, not a week later, not after copping flack from the media, but ON THE DAY, EVERY DAY no matter who the victims were.

Try telling that to the victims of fort hood who STILL are trying to get it labeled a terror attack...

Why are we using tax payer money to fund anyone who is a drain on the economy?
I say we kick all the old people who raise prescription meds cost for everyone cause they are too poor to pay for it out of the country.

Are those old people US citizens who have paid into the system via their medicare deductions from their wages each year for decades? THEN why would we tell them "sorry you are too old, get out"

Yeah, ok.
Can we get an equal amount of money to pay for what the "legal aliens" do to people?
Nawww, that's "unfair".

I've often wondered why in the UK a fund has been set up to take care of crime victims but nothing similar gets done here..

Is that a serious question?
Your car gets stolen, there is one witness, but they will not step forward because they are illegal.
Your house gets torched, there is one witness, but they will not step forward because they are illegal.
Your dog gets poisoned, there is one witness, but they will not step forward because they are illegal.
Your best friend is beaten to death in an ally, there is one witness, but they will not step forward because they are illegal.

Would you want them to step forward?

Your wife gets raped by an illegal alien who's been deported 5 times before, has a dozen stolen IDS.. So why not just let him stay...

[Falcon Horus]

If those people are "entitled" to anything, that entitlement should be fulfilled by their home country.

What part of basic human rights don't you understand?

They are entitled to being treated with respect until the point they are send back from where they came, or allowed to enter as an "legal" immigrant.

As far as I'm concerned, the only government "entitlement" someone who has come into the country illegally, or overstayed a visa/etc. is the right to an immediate deportation. Period.

So, you saw the title (the 2nd one I imagine), didn't read the article and assumed you knew what it was talking about... Well done!

Here, allow me to inform you that it talks about immigrants using the system:

"Federal law does prevent illegal aliens from receiving benefits meant for American citizens. The only benefit that illegal aliens are allowed is emergency medical care.

Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least one third of foreign born citizens in the United States are illegal aliens. Since children born in the United States are considered U.S. Citizens, it becomes complicated when illegal aliens then bear children who are U.S. Citizens.

If the U.S. government sent the parents of these children away, we would be separating families. Now that these families have given birth to U.S. citizens, the families are eligible for benefits such as WIC and food stamps. Benefits such as these are for low income families. Illegal aliens often work in low paying jobs so they now qualify for benefits."

There you go.

Why on Earth should any country have to provide benefits to those that sneak into the country? There is no possible logically justifiable reason.

In Belgium, their children are even required to be enrolled into schools and attend school regularly.
And by their, I mean asylum-seekers, immigrants awaiting visas to stay, illegal immigrants passing through, immigrants who's stays were denied and are awaiting deportation.

Oh, and a "National Immigration Law Center" website is a source I would pay attention to? I didn't even bother to look at the others.

I'm sorry I couldn't find you a better source on Fox News, or Breitbart.

How about this page: cis.org
The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit research organization founded in 1985. It is the nation's only think tank devoted exclusively to research and policy analysis of the economic, social, demographic, fiscal, and other impacts of immigration on the United States.

There, right up your conservative ally:

The Center for Immigration Studies, founded in 1985, is a think tank “devoted exclusively to research and policy analysis of the economic, social, demographic, fiscal, and other impacts of immigration on the United States.” The center’s research and policy positions are conservative, and it advocates a “pro-immigrant, low-immigrant” position, which “seeks fewer immigrants but a warmer welcome for those admitted.”

Its website contains a number of reports and other publications, which can be viewed by topic, such as immigration numbers, history, legal and illegal immigration, costs, refugees, and assimilation and citizenship. While many of its papers are written to buttress the center’s support for tighter limits on immigration, other publications, including profiles and numbers of foreign-born populations, are straightforward analyses of Census Bureau data. The center’s director of research, Steven A. Camarota, has been widely quoted in the media on immigration matters.

The center has received grants from conservative foundations including the Sarah Scaife Foundation and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, according to those organizations’ annual reports.

Comments: Journalists often turn to CIS when looking for a conservative point of view on immigration.

Political Leanings: Conservative

Asylum/Refugee is a bit different, but that's beside the point. What do you do with those who sneak into your country without following whatever legal process there is? Just sneak in by whatever means they can. I notice you didn't address that.

I gave you an article about them.
Gatecat even quoted it.

Try telling that to the victims of fort hood who STILL are trying to get it labeled a terror attack.

There were two shootings, one in 2009 (which you are referring to since the shooter was being radicalized) and 2014.

Another case, which shows that a better cooperation between agencies can lead to a better prevention of people going off the deep end and committing attacks against others.

Are those old people US citizens who have paid into the system via their medicare deductions from their wages each year for decades? THEN why would we tell them "sorry you are too old, get out"

You do remember the Affordable Care Act is going away right. There won't be any old people left to use in arguments when it does.

Your wife gets raped by an illegal alien who's been deported 5 times before, has a dozen stolen IDS.. So why not just let him stay...

Your wife gets raped by an American, and the American walks free after a few months or maybe a year when he's white. And goes behind bars for close to 25 years when he's black.

Questions?

[Falcon Horus]

Oh darn, I was going to post a video as well...