Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Donald Trump Is Still Setting Up Concentration Camps on American Soil

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Donald Trump Is Still Setting Up Concentration Camps on American Soil

    according to Haaretz Donald Trump Is Still Setting Up Concentration Camps on American Soil

    https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.pre...soil-1.6197513


  • #2
    I suspected they'd keep trying on the low down: call it something else, inter the families together, that sort of thing. They still have enough support - to a third of the country the President shits gold and can do no wrong. Plus they like seeing brown people in cages.

    I predict this will be a long battle with a lot of court rulings made, overturned and appealed; people held indefinitely, prisoners abused and rights trampled. Human rights abuse is in the blood of these thugs, in their veins. Now they have a leader who normalizes it, they'll keep trying.

    Comment


    • #3
      What an irresponsible use of the word "concentration camp". If that indeed is a concentration camp, then so were those interim detainment facilities established during the G20 riots.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by budgie View Post
        I suspected they'd keep trying on the low down: call it something else, inter the families together, that sort of thing. They still have enough support - to a third of the country the President shits gold and can do no wrong. Plus they like seeing brown people in cages.

        I predict this will be a long battle with a lot of court rulings made, overturned and appealed; people held indefinitely, prisoners abused and rights trampled. Human rights abuse is in the blood of these thugs, in their veins. Now they have a leader who normalizes it, they'll keep trying.
        Just when I think you can’t possibly be more offensive and disgusting you are.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by muck View Post
          What an irresponsible use of the word "concentration camp". If that indeed is a concentration camp, then so were those interim detainment facilities established during the G20 riots.
          Especially considering it's an Israeli news outlet. Seriously lowering public interest when actual genocide is commited. "The boy who cried wolf".

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by riderboy View Post
            Just when I think you can’t possibly be more offensive and disgusting you are.

            Cry me a river. The treatment of these families is 'offensive and disgusting'.

            Trump and his cohorts (Miller, Bannon and the like) are racists. They are the ones who are offensive and disgusting. Everyone can see it. It is not offensive to point it out. They do not need protection from such charges - they wear it on their sleeves. Just call them out on it.

            You can still hate on Dems and Obama and Clinton and 'libtards' and 'Eurowussies' all you like. They're not mutually exclusive. But for chrissakes it's past time to admit Trump's greatest flaw. He is an incompassionate bigot.

            Comment


            • #7
              so which president are you talking about? that could be anyone all the way to woodrow wilson there skippy...

              Originally posted by budgie View Post
              I suspected they'd keep trying on the low down: call it something else, inter the families together, that sort of thing. They still have enough support - to a third of the country the President shits gold and can do no wrong. Plus they like seeing brown people in cages.

              I predict this will be a long battle with a lot of court rulings made, overturned and appealed; people held indefinitely, prisoners abused and rights trampled. Human rights abuse is in the blood of these thugs, in their veins. Now they have a leader who normalizes it, they'll keep trying.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by budgie View Post
                Everyone can see it.
                Back to your old ways again? I don't see it – why must your intuition trump mine? So far, I've not been shown any evidence whatsoever that this administration would've acted differently had those illegal immigrants been Koreans, stereotypical Germans or fricking four-eyed Martians.

                Let me spell it out for you: Laws against illegal immigration exist for a reason, and the reason ain't to be mean to anyone.

                According to Jellinek's General Theory of State, a state without existing borders isn't even a state. A state without a clearly definable population isn't a state neither. From a jurisprudential point of view, a state that doesn't secure its own borders against outsiders has no legitimacy asking those on the inside to respect the law. More than that, it's entirely within the rights of every nation on this goddamn planet to determine who'll get to settle within its borders and who won't.

                Illegal immigration verifiably leads to a discernable rise in crime, as A) having no known whereabouts makes a life of crime much easier to pursue and B) a high percentage of economic migrants are social outcasts in their own country of origin anyway. Some governments (such as Tunisia, Honduras and Kosovo as of late or Cuba in the past) have deliberately rid themselves of their mischief-makers and sent them our way. Terrorists camouflaging as immigrants have verifiably infiltrated Europe and even the US on several occasions.

                Illegal immigration verifiably leads to health risks. In Europe, tuberculosis and scabies used to be almost eradicated; now, the numbers are up a whopping 1700% in some countries.

                Last but not least, we've seen in Europe that illegal immigrants are among the very people who benefit from these laws. If you were to cross my country's border unnoticed and no one knows you're there, what's to stop me from abducting you and forcing you to work for me six ways from sundays? What's to stop me from abducting your daughter and put her in a brothel? Who looks after you if you're sick? Who'll feed you if you're too old to make a living?

                Illegal. immigration. is. a. crime. And they who decide to break the law need not be surprised about a subsequent treatment that's not to their liking.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by muck View Post

                  Back to your old ways again? I don't see it – why must your intuition trump mine? So far, I've not been shown any evidence whatsoever that this administration would've acted differently had those illegal immigrants been Koreans, stereotypical Germans or fricking four-eyed Martians.

                  Let me spell it out for you: Laws against illegal immigration exist for a reason, and the reason ain't to be mean to anyone.
                  I am not disputing that countries should have immigration laws or protect their borders. That's not me, sorry, it's a straw man.

                  My complaint (and outside this little right wing bubble I'm in the majority it seems) is that the treatment people are getting is unnecessarily harsh. Moreover we have seen from day one of Trump's political career that he, and the people he surrounds himself with, are often motivated by racial animus. Intuition? It is hardly required. Trump has been wearing it on his sleeve since Birtherism. When someone tells you who they are, listen.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My moral judgement tells me we have a member who is intolerant and filled with irrational and obsessive hate toward anyone holding different opinions than him (i.e. anyone who isn't a fellow leftist liberal).

                    There is a dictionary term for people like that. 5 Bonus Points to anyone who can guess what it is.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Enlightened?

                      What did I win?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                        My moral judgement tells me we have a member who is intolerant and filled with irrational and obsessive hate toward anyone holding different opinions than him (i.e. anyone who isn't a fellow leftist liberal).

                        There is a dictionary term for people like that. 5 Bonus Points to anyone who can guess what it is.

                        Don't be childish. I have a perfectly rational dislike of a self-professed bigot named Donald J. Trump and certain of his like-minded advisers. As usual this has to resort to name calling and attacks on personal values, but I know I'm right about that bastard: he has given me no cause to think otherwise.
                        Last edited by budgie; 21-06-2018, 09:32 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Devil Child View Post
                          Enlightened?

                          What did I win?
                          You only reach the Enlightened level when you've donated over $100,000 to the Church Foundation. Kifflom brother-brother.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by budgie View Post
                            I am not disputing that countries should have immigration laws or protect their borders. That's not me, sorry, it's a straw man. My complaint (and outside this little right wing bubble I'm in the majority it seems) is that the treatment people are getting is unnecessarily harsh.
                            Now we have something to discuss. I'm willing to hear you out on this, but don't be surprised it looks like you'd rather see all illegal immigrants freed. The Democratic Party whose stance you've been championing refused to support a Republican parliamentary motion to ease the treatment of minors on the border; instead they called upon Trump to change by decree a policy initiated and legally cleared by a United States District Court. Isn't it a lawmaker's job to change the way the law is applied if aforesaid application gives cause to objection?

                            And didn't they wag a finger at Trump every time he'd issue an executive order? Now they called him out for not issuing one? The truth is, they don't seem to care about those children. They want to pin this on Trump, they want all immigrants released, and they've said as much.

                            Originally posted by budgie View Post
                            Moreover we have seen from day one of Trump's political career that he, and the people he surrounds himself with, are often motivated by racial animus. Intuition? It is hardly required. Trump has been wearing it on his sleeve since Birtherism. When someone tells you who they are, listen.
                            …and so we'd merrily veer off into emotion territory again.

                            I have a Muslim friend with whom I agree occasionally. Does that make me a Muslim? I don't give a damn about the people Trump surrounds himself with. As for himself, again, I'm not aware of any statements of Trump's that'd give compelling evidence of his belief in the superiority of his ethnicity. He's been married to women of Slavic origin. None of his international business relations have ever come forth to accuse him of racism. He's got the support of a significant chunk of ethnic minorities.

                            Has he made blanket statements about Muslims and Latin-American immigrants? He has – not citing their country of origin or their religion, but their alleged conduct in the United States or comparable societies. As long as these groups are, statistically speaking, indeed more troublesome than others, I find myself unable to label him a racist. He's been addressing real issues, if in an inflammatory way. At worst, it's culturalism – a big difference.

                            Here's something which at the very least you should be taking away from this comment: I don't like Trump. I think he's stupid, crude and I find it nigh-impossible to discern his influence for better or for worse. And yet here I am, defending the man, feeling virtually compelled by your righteous wrath. It would seem to me that many Americans feel like that. Trump's got 2020 in the bag if the left continues as it were. Which begs the question I'd asked you many a time.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by muck View Post

                              Now we have something to discuss. I'm willing to hear you out on this, but don't be surprised it looks like you'd rather see all illegal immigrants freed. The Democratic Party whose stance you've been championing refused to support a Republican parliamentary motion to ease the treatment of minors on the border; instead they called upon Trump to change by decree a policy initiated and legally cleared by a United States District Court. Isn't it a lawmaker's job to change the way the law is applied if aforesaid application gives cause to objection?

                              And didn't they wag a finger at Trump every time he'd issue an executive order? Now they called him out for not issuing one? The truth is, they don't seem to care about those children. They want to pin this on Trump, they want all immigrants released, and they've said as much.
                              In an ideal world freeing the lot would be fine with me, but it's not practical. A country can't take in everyone and those that come legally have to get priority over those who don't. Thereafter those who behave lawfully must get preference and so on. I get it and that's the law anyway.

                              As for the Dems wanting to pin this latest roundup and particularly its less humane aspects on Trump, that's not hard to do: it's on him. Records and memos show he and advisers like Miller and Bannon have wanted draconian tools like forced separation for a while and he had his people order it.


                              Originally posted by muck View Post

                              …and so we'd merrily veer off into emotion territory again.

                              I have a Muslim friend with whom I agree occasionally. Does that make me a Muslim? I don't give a damn about the people Trump surrounds himself with. As for himself, again, I'm not aware of any statements of Trump's that'd give compelling evidence of his belief in the superiority of his ethnicity. He's been married to women of Slavic origin. None of his international business relations have ever come forth to accuse him of racism. He's got the support of a significant chunk of ethnic minorities.

                              Has he made blanket statements about Muslims and Latin-American immigrants? He has – not citing their country of origin or their religion, but their alleged conduct in the United States or comparable societies. As long as these groups are, statistically speaking, indeed more troublesome than others, I find myself unable to label him a racist. He's been addressing real issues, if in an inflammatory way. At worst, it's culturalism – a big difference.
                              This only tells me you set the bar higher for racism (or at least a milder form of discrimination) than I do. That's not a bad thing, just a higher tolerance. Me, I take him at face value. I think Trump, making making sweeping generalizations or painting with a broad brush is attacking all Muslims, immigrants, Hispanics and others just for who they are: he's obviously not going to come right out and say it's because they're brown in so many words, but this has been his MO for years.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X