One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main
I have no choice: I am a liberal
Page <<first <prev 14 of 21 next> last>>
Jul 18, 2018 15:37:47   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
JoyV wrote:
I can understand you being okay with Bush (GW I assume) as he was just a paler version of Obama. And I'm not referring to skin tone. They were both in favor of NWO and both favored outsourcing and trade which gave preferential treatment to the non American side.




I have never been sure what the NWO was or was meant by the term..

Trade.... the current trade methods are more a matter of evolving agreements rather then set by one time written agreement. although that must be the trend..

So I feel that if these agreements did evolve, they did so with the American companies giving plenty of input.. The largest consumer nation on earth has a lot of clout..

One more point, trade agreements are never 50-50, One nation will always buy more from the 2nd nation then the reverse. for a great number of reasons.

For the moment, labor costs are the biggest factor on that ratio..



Reply
Jul 18, 2018 15:45:25   #
Noraa Loc: Kansas
 
permafrost wrote:
Well, as I have asked before and never get any answer, how do you make the jump that if someone supports humain treatment for all these immigrants and I******s that they should provide housing for those people.

Or any people for that matter. You get on our case, all we want is proper and kind treatment of these people.. If you do not like the law or the ways the law has been bent, help get the law changed and enforced..

If they are murders, felons, rapists etc, lock em up and send em back ASAP.. but to victimize the families and children is not the American way..
Well, as I have asked before and never get any ans... (show quote)


Because you want to let these people in that are breaking the law!! How do we know if they are rapists, murders, etc. if we don't hold them and check them out. We can't keep the kids in detention while we do this. I feel as soon as they come hear illegally that should be turned back immediately. Our detentions are overwhelmed now and they are having to put them in jails. I don't think we should just say okay you can come in and we will check you out later. They will be impossible to find and what if the kids they brought in aren't theirs? You want to let them in let them stay with you!

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 16:07:44   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
https://religionnews.com/2018/07/17/researchers-find-link-between-trump-tweets-and-spike-in-anti-muslim-h**e/


(RNS) — It may be a law of nature: President Trump tweets something about Islam. Anti-Muslim h**e crimes follow.

That’s according to a working paper by University of Warwick researchers Karsten Müller and Carlo Schwarz.

Their conclusions correspond with anecdotal reports collected by Muslim civil rights and advocacy groups, too.

“Whether it’s a tweet or whether it’s in a policy (Trump is) introducing, or if it’s in a policy someone in his administration is introducing, I think it all comes together to create this kind of environment where targeting Muslims is acceptable or has become acceptable,” said Madihha Ahussain, special counsel for anti-Muslim bigotry at Muslim Advocates.

Müller and Schwarz examined publicly accessible data such as the weekly number of anti-Muslim h**e crimes recorded by the FBI in their paper, “Making America H**e Again? Twitter and H**e Crime Under Trump.”

The data showed a rise in anti-Muslim h**e crimes since the start of Trump’s p**********l campaign, concentrated in counties with high Twitter usage. It also showed a correlation between the number of Trump’s tweets in a given week that used keywords related to Islam and the number of anti-Muslim h**e crimes that followed.



https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/fabiola-santiago/article211319219.html

We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — we’re stopping a lot of them,” Trump said. “You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people, these are animals, and we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before.”

Yes, the president of the United States of America called people seeking refuge at the border “animals.” He's no longer the candidate using anti-immigrant epithets to outdo a crowded Republican slate of hopefuls, but he doesn't act it.
https://religionnews.com/2018/07/17/researchers-fi... (show quote)


The most recent FBI statistics on h**e crimes are 2016. Here is 2016 followed by 2015 for comparison.
Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias (Based on Table 1.)
In 2016, law enforcement agencies reported that 4,229 single-bias h**e crime offenses were motivated by race/ethnicity/ancestry. Of these offenses:

50.2 percent were motivated by anti-Black or African American bias.
20.7 percent stemmed from anti-White bias.
10.6 percent were classified as anti-Hispanic or Latino bias.
4.2 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
3.8 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian or Alaska Native bias.
3.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian bias.
1.3 percent were classified as anti-Arab bias.
0.2 percent (9 offenses) were motivated by bias of anti-Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
5.8 percent were the result of an anti-Other Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias.

Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias (Based on Table 1.)
In 2015, law enforcement agencies reported that 4,029 single-bias h**e crime offenses were motivated by race/ethnicity/ancestry. Of these offenses:

52.7 percent were motivated by anti-Black or African American bias.
18.2 percent stemmed from anti-White bias.
9.4 percent were classified as anti-Hispanic or Latino bias.
3.4 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian or Alaska Native bias.
3.4 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
3.3 percent resulted from anti-Asian bias.
1.2 percent were classified as anti-Arab bias.
0.1 percent (6 offenses) were motivated by bias of anti-Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
8.2 percent were the result of an anti-other Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias.


The largest increase was anti-white h**e crimes while anti-black h**e crime decreased. So does this prove Trump is r****t against w****s and for b****s?

The increase in anti-Muslim h**e crime was about 0.1% The increase in Muslim population is greater than 0.1% so the incidences can't really be said to be on the rise proportionally.



Reply
 
 
Jul 18, 2018 16:40:48   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
Did you forget about the torch bearing mobs marching around looking for victims in Charlotsville?

Did you forget about the murder by car of an unarmed non violent counter demonstrater??


Yes there were mobs. There were w***e s*********t mobs (NOT Trump supporters nor Republicans) and there were mobs including Black L***s m****r and A****a. Not to mention civil rights groups, church groups, and who knows how many other groups including a late arriving m*****a. There was violence and injuries on many sides. The driver who mowed people down was a member of a w***e s*********t group which was openly against the US Constitution. Nor is it clear he even knew or cared which side he was attacking as he paused while driving by. Being anti-constitutional is again the opposite of Trump supporters and Trump.

Now if you want to cherry pick that both the w***e s*********ts and Trump espouse nationalist ideals as a way to link them; remember the slogans were anti-Israel and anti-Jew which is also what the left campaigns against and which is the opposite of Trump and his followers.

In every pro-Trump rally which w***e s*********ts try to crash; they are asked forcibly to leave. Even that is done without harm or with minimal to them. If they will not desist when Trump supporters block them with a wall of bodies, they are firmly marched out without hitting, yelling, or bloodshed.

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 16:42:51   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
Which time do you want, 2015, 16, 17 or 18...???


Try this from FOX.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/06/trumps-mar-lago-seeks-to-hire-61-foreign-workers.html

Despite his rhetoric that immigration hurts American workers, President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club is seeking to hire 61 foreign workers for the 2018 winter season, according to the Labor Department.

Trump’s “Winter White House” has applied to hire 21 cooks from other countries to work at the resort from October to May. The Palm Beach, Fla., club also wants to hire 40 foreigners for wait-staff positions.

The seasonal workers would be required to return to their home country once their H-2B visas expire.

Critics of the visa program claim it is a tool employers can use to exploit vulnerable foreign workers and represses wages for American workers by providing a cheap labor source for companies. Supporters say the program is necessary to keep American businesses afloat and allows seasonal businesses to operate at a greater capacity.
Which time do you want, 2015, 16, 17 or 18...??? b... (show quote)


I******s do not carry H2-B visas! While I am opposed to his hiring non Americans, it is a lie to say he is hiring i*****l i*******ts.

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 16:57:14   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
You have a profound misunderstanding about the FBI conclusion.

Find the transcript of the speech.. Not some right wing rags interpretation, tell ing you what they want you to think the speech said..


News reports indicated that while some of the emails contained information that the government considered classified to the highest levels, the information was "innocuous" and not "particularly sensitive" because the emails discussed matters that were simultaneously available in the public domain—such as in newspapers—but the government "owning agency" that acquired that same information by secret means maintains and enforces the classification status nevertheless.[5][6][7] The Los Angeles Times reported in October 2015, "Critics, including many current and former officials, have argued for years that the government classifies too much information, often for reasons that have little to do with actual security threats."[7]

In May 2016, the State Department's Office of the Inspector General released an 83-page report about the State Department's email practices, including Clinton's. In July 2016, Comey announced that the FBI's investigation had concluded that Clinton was "extremely careless" in handling her email system but recommended that no charges be filed against her. On July 6, 2016, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced that no charges would be filed. US p**********l candidate Donald Trump used the nickname Crooked Hillary to criticize Clinton primarily in relation to the email controversy.[8]
You have a profound misunderstanding about the FBI... (show quote)


I watched the televised hearings! I do not routinely watch ANY news station. The term, "extremely careless" was not a term in use but seems to have been coined specifically for Hillary to have the same meaning without the criminal charge of "gross negligence". I agree that the government tends to classify things which should not be classified. That does not negate the crime of sending, receiving, and allowing those without clearence to have access to classified materials. Especially those in the highest classification. Amongst documents which were made accessible by her practice was the active list of operatives and resources of our intelligence agencies. Nor does destroying evidence which has been subpoenaed exonerated by whether or not that evidence should or should not have been classified in the first place.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1607/07/cnr.05.html

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 17:02:12   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
subpoenaed?? valid excuse? Nothing to see right? that is what your comment means?


Read the entire quote and my reply. There is NO excuse for destroying evidence which was subpoenaed whether or not devices are sometimes destroyed to protect the information. Seeing that the info which was supposedly being protected was from the B******i incident, and it was acceptable to leace it up to then but only was destroyed AFTER it was subpoenaed; even that isn't an argument let alone a valid one.

Reply
 
 
Jul 18, 2018 17:05:06   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
National Border Patrol Council
Labor union
Image result for national border patrol council
The National Border Patrol Council is a labor union established in 1967 that represents agents and support staff on the United States Border Patrol. Wikipedia
Affiliation: AFL–CIO
Founded: 1967
Office location: Washington, D.C.
Members: over 18,000


Did you read what I wrote about the border patrol being told to NOT apprehend certain i******s? If you are not allowed to apprehend them, of course the number of apprehensions will go down.

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 17:11:16   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
Noraa wrote:
Because you want to let these people in that are breaking the law!! How do we know if they are rapists, murders, etc. if we don't hold them and check them out. We can't keep the kids in detention while we do this. I feel as soon as they come hear illegally that should be turned back immediately. Our detentions are overwhelmed now and they are having to put them in jails. I don't think we should just say okay you can come in and we will check you out later. They will be impossible to find and what if the kids they brought in aren't theirs? You want to let them in let them stay with you!
Because you want to let these people in that are ... (show quote)




NO, I want a processing method which works..

No one wants criminals, but we do need more people and faster vetting to sort the mix of people coming over..

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 17:13:45   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
JoyV wrote:
The most recent FBI statistics on h**e crimes are 2016. Here is 2016 followed by 2015 for comparison.
Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias (Based on Table 1.)
In 2016, law enforcement agencies reported that 4,229 single-bias h**e crime offenses were motivated by race/ethnicity/ancestry. Of these offenses:

50.2 percent were motivated by anti-Black or African American bias.
20.7 percent stemmed from anti-White bias.
10.6 percent were classified as anti-Hispanic or Latino bias.
4.2 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
3.8 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian or Alaska Native bias.
3.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian bias.
1.3 percent were classified as anti-Arab bias.
0.2 percent (9 offenses) were motivated by bias of anti-Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
5.8 percent were the result of an anti-Other Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias.

Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias (Based on Table 1.)
In 2015, law enforcement agencies reported that 4,029 single-bias h**e crime offenses were motivated by race/ethnicity/ancestry. Of these offenses:

52.7 percent were motivated by anti-Black or African American bias.
18.2 percent stemmed from anti-White bias.
9.4 percent were classified as anti-Hispanic or Latino bias.
3.4 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian or Alaska Native bias.
3.4 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
3.3 percent resulted from anti-Asian bias.
1.2 percent were classified as anti-Arab bias.
0.1 percent (6 offenses) were motivated by bias of anti-Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
8.2 percent were the result of an anti-other Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias.


The largest increase was anti-white h**e crimes while anti-black h**e crime decreased. So does this prove Trump is r****t against w****s and for b****s?

The increase in anti-Muslim h**e crime was about 0.1% The increase in Muslim population is greater than 0.1% so the incidences can't really be said to be on the rise proportionally.
The most recent FBI statistics on h**e crimes are ... (show quote)




No, it only shows that so many b****s and minority have been k**led the target group is hard to find..

so what is your point in posting these stats?? what are you trying to show?



Reply
Jul 18, 2018 17:16:10   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
JoyV wrote:
The most recent FBI statistics on h**e crimes are 2016. Here is 2016 followed by 2015 for comparison.
Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias (Based on Table 1.)
In 2016, law enforcement agencies reported that 4,229 single-bias h**e crime offenses were motivated by race/ethnicity/ancestry. Of these offenses:

50.2 percent were motivated by anti-Black or African American bias.
20.7 percent stemmed from anti-White bias.
10.6 percent were classified as anti-Hispanic or Latino bias.
4.2 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
3.8 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian or Alaska Native bias.
3.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian bias.
1.3 percent were classified as anti-Arab bias.
0.2 percent (9 offenses) were motivated by bias of anti-Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
5.8 percent were the result of an anti-Other Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias.

Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias (Based on Table 1.)
In 2015, law enforcement agencies reported that 4,029 single-bias h**e crime offenses were motivated by race/ethnicity/ancestry. Of these offenses:

52.7 percent were motivated by anti-Black or African American bias.
18.2 percent stemmed from anti-White bias.
9.4 percent were classified as anti-Hispanic or Latino bias.
3.4 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian or Alaska Native bias.
3.4 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
3.3 percent resulted from anti-Asian bias.
1.2 percent were classified as anti-Arab bias.
0.1 percent (6 offenses) were motivated by bias of anti-Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
8.2 percent were the result of an anti-other Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry bias.


The largest increase was anti-white h**e crimes while anti-black h**e crime decreased. So does this prove Trump is r****t against w****s and for b****s?

The increase in anti-Muslim h**e crime was about 0.1% The increase in Muslim population is greater than 0.1% so the incidences can't really be said to be on the rise proportionally.
The most recent FBI statistics on h**e crimes are ... (show quote)




The increase in anti-white h**e crimes may be explained by the k*****gs of gay, athiest and liberals.. by the right wing fools of the kkk and alt-right..

Reply
 
 
Jul 18, 2018 17:16:47   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
No, the separation is done per trumps "zero tolerance" policy.. that alone is why the children are separated.. It is by design.. trumps design..

can you give me any example of trump acting in a humain manner to these families fleeing the murders in their home county?

You are pushing the human trafficking wish that the right wing rushed in to counter the failure to meet the time requirements when the families could not be located to be rejoined in the proper time frame..


The zero tolerance policy was NOT Trump's policy. It was put in place by GW Bush in 2005. Trump is enforcing it but he did not write it or sign it into place.

So if you don't believe that the children accompanied by adults who don't know the kids names are really their parents and not traffickers; what is so wrong with DNA testing to be sure? What is the big rush to hand the kids over when a few days to two weeks will give the proof? Most paternity tests which are available for the public take 4 to 5 days.

How about the example of putting children into child protective services when the adults who claim to be their parents don't know the names of the children? But of course, the left favors harmful behavior of adults over the safety of children in other areas, so why should we be surprised when the children's safety is not considered a priority here either?

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 17:18:51   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
Why should I sponcor anyone? I pay all my taxes and do not c***t on them..

I am pure as the driven snow.. those who c***t and do not pay taxes should have to house these people..


If you want them in the country, you should be willing to sponsor them. Or at least one family. Can we say hypocrisy?

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 17:21:41   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
JoyV wrote:
Yes there were mobs. There were w***e s*********t mobs (NOT Trump supporters nor Republicans) and there were mobs including Black L***s m****r and A****a. Not to mention civil rights groups, church groups, and who knows how many other groups including a late arriving m*****a. There was violence and injuries on many sides. The driver who mowed people down was a member of a w***e s*********t group which was openly against the US Constitution. Nor is it clear he even knew or cared which side he was attacking as he paused while driving by. Being anti-constitutional is again the opposite of Trump supporters and Trump.

Now if you want to cherry pick that both the w***e s*********ts and Trump espouse nationalist ideals as a way to link them; remember the slogans were anti-Israel and anti-Jew which is also what the left campaigns against and which is the opposite of Trump and his followers.

In every pro-Trump rally which w***e s*********ts try to crash; they are asked forcibly to leave. Even that is done without harm or with minimal to them. If they will not desist when Trump supporters block them with a wall of bodies, they are firmly marched out without hitting, yelling, or bloodshed.
Yes there were mobs. There were w***e s*********t... (show quote)



Those torch bearing mobs were fully supporting trump and trump supported them..

Openly against the US constitution... a friend of the Bundys no doubt..

All the chants were anti brown, immigrants, gays and anything non trump..

Pro trump and w***e s*********ts are one and the same..

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 17:23:16   #
JoyV
 
permafrost wrote:
Who is he??

I have little problem with this.. I abide by the courts decision..

Even when I do not like it. as the recent public unions by the SC..

If the courts could not find a point of law which was not met, then the state law would have stood..


He is Obama. His name was used in other sentences in the paragraph. The statement that Obama was simply enforcing the court rulings when he attacked AZ is bogus. There were no court rulings when he (Obama) brought his first law suit. Nor did the courts agree with him (Obama) at first. It took repeated attempts.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 14 of 21 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.