The Donald Trump Thread

You took all context out by selectively quoting what I said. I said that there have been many more violent deaths by other groups or domestic gun killings - if Americans are really concerned about safety surely that should be a higher priority?
Yes, but you might as well add the number of deaths from road accidents - it really isn't the same. The attacks that I listed have been done because those people could not tolerate Western life. Those fanatics were giving their lives to kill as many people as possible. I mean, I would have thought the US would have learned from 9/11 - total fanatics can do terrible things out of all proportion to their numbers. It was rumoured that one of those planes was meant to crash into a nuclear power station!
I am skeptical whether he will scale it back, but glad we agree that US foreign policy is a massive issue.

If he fails to do it, it will be because of opponents - many of them Democrat - that can't seem to see that if we don't mess about with Russia, they won't mess about with us. The UK is almost as bad, but it is the US that has taken the lead in whole process. I mean, to take just one example, Afghanistan would be in a far better place right now if the US had left the Soviets in charge to control them. Girls could go to school, for example, but the US let the Taleban in, and then had to fight them. It was the same story with Saddam Hussein - they backed him with weapons, and then ended up fighting him.

David
 
Yes, but you might as well add the number of deaths from road accidents - it really isn't the same. The attacks that I listed have been done because those people could not tolerate Western life. Those fanatics were giving their lives to kill as many people as possible. I mean, I would have thought the US would have learned from 9/11 - total fanatics can do terrible things out of all proportion to their numbers. It was rumoured that one of those planes was meant to crash into a nuclear power station!


If he fails to do it, it will be because of opponents - many of them Democrat - that can't seem to see that if we don't mess about with Russia, they won't mess about with us. The UK is almost as bad, but it is the US that has taken the lead in whole process. I mean, to take just one example, Afghanistan would be in a far better place right now if the US had left the Soviets in charge to control them. Girls could go to school, for example, but the US let the Taleban in, and then had to fight them. It was the same story with Saddam Hussein - they backed him with weapons, and then ended up fighting him.

David

David

Stop obfuscating and avoiding addressing my point. A domestic terrorist could kill as many people as a Muslim one. The point is that domestic guns kill far more Americans then Muslim terrorists do annually. If it's about keeping people safe when it comes to violent crime - America should be focusing on the latter objectively. It's own society is producing a lot of violence.

If Trump fails it might just be Trumps fault. Eventually you'll have to accept Trump can make mistakes or that misdirecting from his mistakes will no longer be viable!
 
.
"The Gatestone Institute has been accused of being islamophobic, and of promoting falsehoods and paranoia.[12][24][25][26]J. Dana Stuster, writing in The Hill, says Gatestone is fear-mongering when it warns of a “civilization jihad” consisting of a “Muslim invasion” of “illegal migrants” that will bring crime and exhaust the European welfare system.[26]Carol Matlack, professor of sociology at the University of Bath, and Tom Mills, lecturer in sociology at Aston University, single out Soeren Kern's articles on Muslim no-go zones in Europe as examples of misinformation and Islamophobia."

I'm sure it has been accused of being Islamophobic. Everything that is seen as critical of muslims or Islam is accused of being Islamophobic.

A few years ago I would to avoid certain sources because I had been informed by my ideological peers that they were no good, and that everything in them were lies and propaganda. Now I look at everything and make up my own mind up based on the kind of information they offer, the ideological foundations, and how well the information 'fits' with other reliable sources.

The Gatestone Institute has a conservative approach and some articles can be somewhat dramatic. But it is based on more substance than opinion and I have never found them to omit the truth because it doesn't fit their narrative like some major media outlets that should do better at providing an accurate picture of the truth, no matter how distasteful it may be.

"The actual number of migrant-related sex crimes in Germany is at least two or three times higher than the official number. Only 10% of the sex crimes committed in Germany appear in the official statistics." — André Schulz, head of the Criminal Police Association.
 
Last edited:
Ok. But you agree with the research that historically (pre 2010) there has been no link between immigration and increased crime rates?

I was going to write a fairly long response to this but I think I will keep it brief.

I think the problem is not so much immigration but rather integration, and that is where we have run into difficulties more recently. I have no doubt that those studies of immigrants over the last 40 years to the US (and the original study is quite specific to the US) are accurate. The US, Canada and I think to a large extent Australia and New Zealand have long and profound histories of immigration and have done very well because of it. I am an immigrant myself, married to an immigrant, and I know that you have to really want to be somewhere if you are prepared to pack up your life and move half way across the world.

The problem arises when immigration occurs too fast for successful integration, or when integration is resisted for some other reason. Rather than integration into cultural norms, enclaves get set up and language, education, employment etc are all impeded. In turn, crime has clearly increased (and I am talking Europe here, not so much the US). The biggest problem by far is that rather than admit that there is a problem, the idealists want to see a reality that they hope for, rather than the one that exists.

Distorting reality has led to some serious social divisions between the people that live the reality of failed integration, and those that continue to push open borders on others for either ideological, or financial reasons. The police, emergency services and social welfare resources are reaching their limits. Censorship is preferable to change for the 'powers that be' in Germany and Sweden. The people are constantly told how everything is fine and if you don't think it is then you're a racist. The stats are manipulated, ethnicity is not mentioned in crime statistics, rape statistics only include the cases that have been solved (and that's not many). Sentences and deportations are rare in order to minimize the stats which really just makes the problem bigger as there is no deterrent and more criminals. This of course is not good for immigrants, migrants, refugees who really do want to make a positive change in a new country and abide by that country's laws as they have a harder time being accepted and there are less resources available to them.

Back to Novella's article. First, it is a blog, (albeit one that looks like a legitimate news source), and second he gives his bias away when he states that anyone who questions the research that there is no correlation between immigration and crime should make you laugh or cry. When, what population, what countries of origin or cultural influence? None of these questions are examined.

The information is there but most people just look for confirmation bias.
 
Last edited:
It was rumoured that one of those planes was meant to crash into a nuclear power station!
I believe that particular piece of information was obtained from KSM through torture. I think it is unclear if it is actually true or if it is just what KSM thought his torturer wanted to hear. Of course it is also unclear if KSM knew anything about 9/11 at all.
 
I believe that particular piece of information was obtained from KSM through torture. I think it is unclear if it is actually true or if it is just what KSM thought his torturer wanted to hear. Of course it is also unclear if KSM knew anything about 9/11 at all.
I didn't know that, but nevertheless, the point is that letting in large numbers of people, some of whom are prepared to give their lives to the effort to attack their host country, is pretty crazy.

In the UK, the security services spend an immense amount of effort tracking terrorists and would-be terrorists. This is demonstrated by a long list of court cases that relate to plots that were caught in time. There is a sense that this could reach the point where these services will just not be able to cope successfully with the amount of work.

David
 
.


I'm sure it has been accused of being Islamophobic. Everything that is seen as critical of muslims or Islam is accused of being Islamophobic.

A few years ago I would to avoid certain sources because I had been informed by my ideological peers that they were no good, and that everything in them were lies and propaganda. Now I look at everything and make up my own mind up based on the kind of information they offer, the ideological foundations, and how well the information 'fits' with other reliable sources.

The Gatestone Institute has a conservative approach and some articles can be somewhat dramatic. But it is based on more substance than opinion and I have never found them to omit the truth because it doesn't fit their narrative like some major media outlets that should do better at providing an accurate picture of the truth, no matter how distasteful it may be.

"The actual number of migrant-related sex crimes in Germany is at least two or three times higher than the official number. Only 10% of the sex crimes committed in Germany appear in the official statistics." — André Schulz, head of the Criminal Police Association.

Why should anyone believe that quote? He's basically saying he cannot back it up but we should believe him anyway.
 
I'm sure it has been accused of being Islamophobic. Everything that is seen as critical of muslims or Islam is accused of being Islamophobic.

The reason I posted this was that I recognised some of the names of the people the Gatestone Institute consist of as Zionists. "Gatestone publicizes the writings of authors, such as Alan Dershowitz, Robert Spencer, David Horowitz, Khaled Abu Toameh, and Harold Rhode." I remember having watched videos of Dershowitz & Horowitz debating Norman Finkelstein on YouTube, how they spew the same old shit. I don't know the facts, but Finkelstein sure as hell does. I strongly oppose the Zionist tribe, they try to defend the indefensible.

I therefore think that the video that you posted is probably heavily biased.
 
My twitter feed is bombarded with Pro and Anti Trump stuff, Pro and Anti Vax and GMO. So many articles and studies my head is spinning lol. Now my feed is full of Milo stuff too

This Milo person seems to have burned hot but also quick. Book cancelled, CPAC invite cancelled. I doubt any college conservative group is going to invite him now that he is seen as an advocate of pedophilia.

Interesting that it was the Reagan Battalion, rather than a liberal group, that brought him down.
 
The reason I posted this was that I recognised some of the names of the people the Gatestone Institute consist of as Zionists. "Gatestone publicizes the writings of authors, such as Alan Dershowitz, Robert Spencer, David Horowitz, Khaled Abu Toameh, and Harold Rhode." I remember having watched videos of Dershowitz & Horowitz debating Norman Finkelstein on YouTube, how they spew the same old shit. I don't know the facts, but Finkelstein sure as hell does. I strongly oppose the Zionist tribe, they try to defend the indefensible.

I therefore think that the video that you posted is probably heavily biased.

What is the shit they spew? What is the indefensible and why do you think they defend it?

Edit: I have looked at the Dershowitz/Finkelstein debate briefly. It seems that Finkelstein is so outraged that he can hardly let his opponent speak. That doesn't make him right, it just means he has a strong opinion. He doesn't seem to be able back up his arguments with facts quite as strongly.

Edit #2 Israel is a complicated issue. I know that you don't hate Jews but I do think that the left has a problem with antisemitism and zionists in particular.
 
Last edited:
And now Nigel Farage jumps in with a truly disgusting slur and appalling appeal to fallacy to support it .... “Malmo in Sweden is the rape capital of Europe due to EU migrant policies. Anyone who says there isn’t a problem is lying to you.”

What has become of sense and debate when buffoons like Trump and Farage strut their divisive nonsense.
 
And now Nigel Farage jumps in with a truly disgusting slur and appalling appeal to fallacy to support it .... “Malmo in Sweden is the rape capital of Europe due to EU migrant policies. Anyone who says there isn’t a problem is lying to you.”

What has become of sense and debate when buffoons like Trump and Farage strut their divisive nonsense.

Do you have a supporting argument, or should it be sufficient to call it "nonsense"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red
Do you have a supporting argument, or should it be sufficient to call it "nonsense"?
Calling something the rape capital of Europe isn't an argument either. It is inflammatory rhetoric. The issue is nuanced. Obviously the MSM is not on board yet with the full extent of the issue, although even on Morning Joe today they admitted there are large issues in Sweden. The dumb back and forth with one side and another is going to get no where.
 
Hurm, to call anywhere a 'rape capital' and then morally impoverish EU migrant policies and then to accuse all contrary positions as 'lying' is in my book a travesty of sense and reason. Farage goes on to speak (surprise surprise) of, “And there is a Swedish media that frankly just doesn’t report it.” I know quite a number of journalists that would spit bile at this inane conspiracy of silence argument.

We may add the data from Philip N Cohen summarised in this tweet from Feb 20 "People circulating Sweden rape stat. FYI, the rate increase from 2004-2011 (maybe cuz definition changed). Refugee influx started 2011." The definitional change refers to a significant expanding of what constitutes a rape in Sweden (Julian Assange a case in point).

But Hurm, any reductionist line applied to a complex, multi factorial problem, is nearly always self serving, especially when framed in language that incites prejudice. I will forever lose my bundle over that. It is bullying and bigoted, serving the worst in us all.
 
HOW TO RUN A ROGUE GOVERNMENT TWITTER ACCOUNT WITH AN ANONYMOUS EMAIL ADDRESS AND A BURNER PHONE

Anonymous speech is firmly protected by the First Amendment and the Supreme Court, and its history in the U.S. dates to the Federalist Papers, written in 1787 and 1788 under the pseudonym Publius by three of the founding fathers.

But the technical ability for people to remain anonymous on today’s internet, where every scrap of data is meticulously tracked, is an entirely different issue. The FBI, a domestic intelligence agency that claims the power to spy on anyone based on suspicions that don’t come close to probable cause, has a long, dark history of violating the rights of Americans. And now it reports directly to President Trump, who is a petty, revenge-obsessed authoritarian with utter disrespect for the courts and the rule of law.

In this environment, how easy is it to create and maintain a Twitter account while preserving your anonymity — even from Twitter and any law enforcement agency that may request its records? I tried to find out, and documented all my steps. There are different ways to accomplish this. If you plan on following these steps you should make sure you understand the purpose of them, in case you need to improvise. I also can’t guarantee that these techniques will protect your anonymity — there are countless ways that things can go wrong, many of them social rather than technical. But I hope you’ll at least have a fighting chance at keeping your real identity private.
 
Edit #2 Israel is a complicated issue. I know that you don't hate Jews but I do think that the left has a problem with antisemitism and zionists in particular.

It's not complicated at all, except if you try to complicate it.

This is what I oppose.

 
Back
Top