Black Sunday

[GMDino]

(11-26-2018, 08:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Enjoy your conversation

This is a sad attempt even for you.

Let's remove your misleading bold and place it where the emphasis should be.

(11-26-2018, 04:25 PM)Dill Wrote: Of course you are. That is the best defense of a choice to shut down the border and deny asylum seekers the opportunity to present themselves legally to U.S. authorities.

The jury is still out though, on whether the order to shut down the border is protecting the law or breaking it. The courts may have to decide that.

What was Dill saying was "the best defense"?  YOUR statement.

(11-26-2018, 04:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree the violence was unnecessary. I'm simply placing the onus on the folks breaking the law instead of those protecting it.

Which came in response to him saying they are alternative to closing down the border.

(11-26-2018, 04:06 PM)Dill Wrote: You speak as if that were some untried alternative; but we had a program for legal entry in place before Sunday.

Trump just shut down legal entry. That was not a pragmatic answer. Unnecessary violence followed to "protect our borders."

So when he said: 

(11-26-2018, 08:25 PM)Dill Wrote: You can create red herrings by falsely accusing people of deploying them.

Nowhere did I say you said that "shutting down the border completely was the best choice."  

I said Trump shut it down, a possibly unconstitutional move, and that complicates your "side with the law protectors not the refugees" argument.

Trump has orchestrated an event, a television drama, in which the country is bound to fall into two parties--those who side with the gassed children and those who side with "the law."  For one the analogy is to hungry, helpless people fleeing violence and for the other criminals are breaking into our house and librals won't fight back. 

It it not just about the law, but about everything which lead up to the confrontation, and the questions some politicians can count on their base--and more--not to ask.

He actually wrote those words...while talking about YOUR statement being used to defend the actions that were taken at the border.  He never quoted you saying it, or accused you OF saying it but that you defended it using "the best defense".

I mean I know you'll never admit you are wrong, but that's flat out lying.

[GMDino]

(11-26-2018, 07:12 PM)Beaker Wrote: It amazes me that there are some who think the US should just let people show up at our border and demand to be let in....and we should do so or we are uncaring jerks. People rushing a border crossing in an attempt to overwhelm is an invasion. I don't care if there were women and children in the crowd, they had no right to assume their actions were in any way justified.

100 people you don't know show up at your front door and demand to be let in your house because you have a nice house and they want to live there because it would be better for them....you letting them in?

It is legal to seek asylum at the border.

It is illegal to break into a house.

Using code words like "overwhelm" and "invasion" doesn't change what is legal and illegal and that Trump wants it ALL to be illegal.

[*bfine32*]

(11-26-2018, 08:53 PM)GMDino Wrote:

This is a sad attempt even for you.

Let's remove your misleading bold and place it where the emphasis should be.


What was Dill saying was "the best defense"?  YOUR statement.


Which came in response to him saying they are alternative to closing down the border.


So when he said: 


He actually wrote those words...while talking about YOUR statement being used to defend the actions that were taken at the border.  He never quoted you saying it, or accused you OF saying it but that you defended it using "the best defense".

I mean I know you'll never admit you are wrong, but that's flat out lying.

Your unbiased play by play aside. I never mentioned anything about closing down the borders; I mentioned about people entering the country illegally. So you, Dill, and the rest of "we" can assert he didn't introduce a stance I didn't make; but it's exactly what happened.

What to discuss the merits of closing the border, feel free. But don't say someone is defending it because they don't want folks entering illegally, unless you want to introduce an argument never made.  So be careful Liberal when you want to accuse someone of "flat out lying".

[GMDino]

(11-26-2018, 09:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Your unbiased play by play aside. I never mentioned anything about closing down the borders; I mentioned about people entering the country illegally. So you, Dill, and the rest of "we" can assert he didn't introduce a stance I didn't make; but it's exactly what happened.

What to discuss the merits of closing the border, feel free. But don't say someone is defending it because they don't want folks entering illegally, unless you want to introduce an argument never made.  So be careful Liberal when you want to accuse someone of "flat out lying".

In context Dill was correct and you put words in his mouth.

Stand by it if you want...I'd expect nothing less.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-26-2018, 03:30 PM)Dill Wrote: If you are speaking only of those LEGALLY ADMITTED with refugee status, then the average under Obama was about 110,000 per year.  In 2018 so far (almost December) the number is 21,000 processed.  (In 1980, Carter admitted 207,000.)

Since we cannot absorb the entirety of Central and South America's poor, someone less myopic than yourself could easily that we must now massively reduce the current rate of acceptance by 70%+.   There is no alternative.

As far as those gassed children go, I blame the parents. Same if we end up shooting some of those kids, because I understand it is either that or let in millions from everywhere.  If you don't want your children gassed then don't walk 1500 miles to OUR border with YOUR problems. Keep them back in Guatemala, El Salvador and the Honduras; complain to the right wing governments we installed there for you to protect you against communism. This is no problem of our making.

Provide links to backing your data please. Preferably from the USCIS Website.
I want to see this because for the 1st quarter 2018, I see almost 30k. So I want to be clear we are talking about the same thing.
It takes about 6 months to process one, so they have a 6 month lag.

(11-26-2018, 03:53 PM)jj22 Wrote: Yes, you clearly said you was fine with the kids being gassed.

Because well Trump tried to be nice and they didn't listen (which Fred rightfully pointed out the asylum process these people are attempting and yet Administration is ignoring).

We got it.

Trump supporters have been gleeful all day about the images of those (mostly kids) getting gassed at the border.

Who's fine with the Kids being gassed???
No one. it's a shame that the kids and women are being used by the men and taking the brunt of the gassing. And the media is feeding you that shit and your lapping it up like a little puppy dogs.

I already said how this was going to go down over a month ago and many of you laughed at me or didn't believe me (right Fred?). With the pics in the media of the women and children while the men hide behind them. I guess some of you haven't seen the pics where kids and women being pushed forward by their hair? Didn't think so, you only see what fits your narrative and jump all over the rest of us for supporting Trump.

Edit: If the wall was up, would they be bum rushing the border to get in???

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-26-2018, 04:20 PM)Dill Wrote: No. Separation was the goal. The hope was that word would spread South--"We'll take your children if you reach our borders." 

Librals mucked up the policy by crying about children's rights and the media made Trump look cruel and insensitive--just like they did when he wanted soldiers to shoot rock throwers or when he gasses children. Imagine how much Trump could get done on the border if only the free press could be barred. 

https://psmag.com/news/how-the-trump-administration-built-a-family-separation-policy-while-denying-it-existed

On May 11th, in the midst of intense public backlash, Trump's incoming chief of staff John Kelly had defended family separation as a necessary evil that acted as a "deterrent" for illegal immigration. Five days later, Nielsen also defended the policy in a Senate hearing, though she continued to deny that Trump had ordered the separations. She held that "zero-tolerance" prosecution made every adult migrant a criminal, and therefore justified separating their children from them.

In June, a little over a week after Nielsen declared, "We will not apologize for doing our job" and separating families, a federal judge in California ordered the government to reunite separated children with their families.

Imagine how much of this wouldn't be necessary if you allowed him to build the wall in full?

[GMDino]

(11-26-2018, 09:14 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Provide links to backing your data please. Preferably from the USCIS Website.
I want to see this because for the 1st quarter 2018, I see almost 30k. So I want to be clear we are talking about the same thing.
It takes about 6 months to process one, so they have a 6 month lag.


Who's fine with the Kids being gassed???
No one. it's a shame that the kids and women are being used by the men and taking the brunt of the gassing. And the media is feeding you that shit and your lapping it up like a little puppy dogs.

I already said how this was going to go down over a month ago and many of you laughed at me or didn't believe me (right Fred?). With the pics in the media of the women and children while the men hide behind them. I guess some of you haven't seen the pics where kids and women being pushed forward by their hair? Didn't think so, you only see what fits your narrative and jump all over the rest of us for supporting Trump.

Edit: If the wall was up, would they be bum rushing the border to get in???

Every single person who says "eh, they are doing illegal things to it's on them".  Every one of them is saying its fine that kids are being gassed...they just aren't blaming the people doing the gassing.

[GMDino]

(11-26-2018, 09:19 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Imagine how much of this wouldn't be necessary if you allowed him to build the wall in full?

He's allowed...but he hasn't had Mexico pay for it yet.  


All seriousness aside there is good security at that entry point.  If Trump doesn't close it there is less frustration and no need to gas anyone.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-26-2018, 04:54 PM)Benton Wrote: You lost me here.

Are you suggesting Trump is going to gas rich people?

Most likely trying to compare Trump to Hitler and use the "fear" method that he accuses Republicans of doing, which is extremely offensive and is not even in the same level.

Anyone can draw similarities to just about anything if they are willing to bend the truth.

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 09:14 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I already said how this was going to go down over a month ago and many of you laughed at me or didn't believe me (right Fred?).

You mean this from 11-8?

(11-08-2018, 06:54 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote:  Most of the caravan has decided to stay in Mexico.
But waves 2 and 3 are on the way, we will see them just in time for the next election cycle

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-26-2018, 05:42 PM)jj22 Wrote: Honestly no. I may need to reread it.

The lesson is degrading a minority group of people and blaming them for economic woes is often used by Dictators (and wanabe Dictators in Trumps case) in their attempts to purify their Nation, and should be viewed with such knowledge since it's been in their playbook for ages. As we saw in the most known case that people can relate to (Hitler).

So you think Trump is going to go after the Legal Immigrants and push them out as well?
Isn't that what Hitler did, pushed out all Jews legal or not? Even pushed them right into their graves.
Let me know when that happens and I'll switch sides gladly, til then stop spouting idiotic comparisons to compare someone to an event that is never going to happen, it's rather embarrassing and highly offensive for those that did live thru it.

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 09:14 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote:  With the pics in the media of the women and children while the men hide behind them. I guess some of you haven't seen the pics where kids and women being pushed forward by their hair? Didn't think so, you only see what fits your narrative and jump all over the rest of us for supporting Trump.

No I have not seen those pics.  Pushed by their hair? Got a link?

I have seen a lot of photos and I see men, women, and children throughout the entire caravan.

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 09:45 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: So you think Trump is going to go after the Legal Immigrants and push them out as well?

Let me know when that happens and I'll switch sides gladly, til then stop spouting idiotic comparisons to compare someone to an event that is never going to happen, it's rather embarrassing and highly offensive for those that did live thru it.

Well here are some things he has said

Trump pointed to what he considered historical precedent to defend his singling out of the Muslim religion with his ban. He used FDR’s Proclamations 2525, 2526, and 2527, which applied to Japanese, Italian, and German Americans in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor as examples. Those proclamations authorized the U.S. to “detain allegedly potentially dangerous enemy aliens” and led to the internment of many of these individuals. 

On Fox Business’ Varney and Company, Trump advocated for the first time monitoring mosques as a way to deal with radical Islamic terror. Asked if he’d consider closing some mosques, Trump said “absolutely, I think it’s great.” 


When he starts talking bout internment camps and shutting down entire religions he is getting closer and closer to Hitler's plan.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-26-2018, 09:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You mean this from 11-8?

Yes thank you, couldn't remember the exact date, but I said it in advance, and what was your response again??

At as to the second part of your thread, I didn't expect them and neither did many others for them to arrive as quickly as they did at the border. I think everyone understands that part.

[Dill]

(11-26-2018, 09:45 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: So you think Trump is going to go after the Legal Immigrants and push them out as well?
Isn't that what Hitler did, pushed out all Jews legal or not? Even pushed them right into their graves.
Let me know when that happens and I'll switch sides gladly, til then stop spouting idiotic comparisons to compare someone to an event that is never going to happen, it's rather embarrassing and highly offensive for those that did live thru it.

You are speaking for those who did "live thru it"?  
https://www.newsweek.com/im-holocaust-survivor-trumps-america-feels-germany-nazis-took-over-876965

What Hitler did was rouse people up against liberals and others who did not "belong" in the new Reich, comparing them to animals and vermin. And Hitler was not just after Jews. The Nazi party platform demanded expulsion of post-1914 emigres and a shutdown of all new immigration, securing borders to prevent "others" from breaking in--like all countries do, they would say.   

And while we are on the subject of comparisons, historians and political scientists see a professional responsibility in comparing Hitler's rise to power in Nazi Germany to the rise of other autocratic regimes--especially where a rollback of democracy is involved. No professional doing that assumes such comparison implies a time table to the holocaust for any country so compared. All recognize a regime could fall far short of the Holocaust/WWII and still be pretty bad. And few see a problem with taking notes and applying them to the current U.S.

Most would agree that the critical period for salvaging disintegrating democracies is BEFORE a potential dictator takes over, when he has begun denigrating the free press, the courts and other institutions whose integrity is necessary for Democracy, appealing to identity grievances while defining and targeting parasitical "outsiders."  And most would agree that the U.S. is currently experiencing some warning signs commonly seen on the road to despotism. To say that is not to predict another Holocaust or claim Trump=Hitler, but to acknowledge that the failure of ordinary people to stand up to illiberal politics can lead to very bad, if as yet indeterminable, results. I've seen nothing in Trump's behavior to suggest he could actually lead the U.S. into a dictatorship, which would require focus and work ethic. But he can certainly generate divisions and gin up international conflicts which could make democracy unworkable in the U.S., leaving others to sort out the mess for years to come.

By the time "it" happens, whatever bad thing may follow from the current embrace of illiberal politics, it may be too late to stop it. That is why people need to switch sides BEFORE it happens.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-26-2018, 09:53 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Well here are some things he has said

Trump pointed to what he considered historical precedent to defend his singling out of the Muslim religion with his ban. He used FDR’s Proclamations 2525, 2526, and 2527, which applied to Japanese, Italian, and German Americans in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor as examples. Those proclamations authorized the U.S. to “detain allegedly potentially dangerous enemy aliens” and led to the internment of many of these individuals. 

On Fox Business’ Varney and Company, Trump advocated for the first time monitoring mosques as a way to deal with radical Islamic terror. Asked if he’d consider closing some mosques, Trump said “absolutely, I think it’s great.” 


When he starts talking bout internment camps and shutting down entire religions he is getting closer and closer to Hitler's plan.

Or FDR. Just sayin’

[Beaker]

(11-26-2018, 08:09 PM)Benton Wrote: Wait... How do you stop them from showing up at the border (outside of diplomacy, which I'll repeat is what we should have done)?

I get stopping them from crossing but when did it become 'it's not ok for people to want to come here'?

Its fine to want to come here. But the legal way, not rushing the border en masse. 

[Beaker]

(11-26-2018, 08:57 PM)GMDino Wrote: It is legal to seek asylum at the border.

It is illegal to break into a house.

Using code words like "overwhelm" and "invasion" doesn't change what is legal and illegal and that Trump wants it ALL to be illegal.

I used the words overwhelm and invasion because that's what they are trying to do currently. And it is legal to seek asylum. Just like its legal to come to your front door and ask to be let in. But as soon as they try to push their way past you into your house because they are frustrated you won't let them in it becomes illegal. Just like at the border. At that point, the border guards should be allowed to prevent them from crossing as necessary.

And Trump has said before he is ok with immigrants coming to this country legally through proper channels. I can't stand Trump, but I gotta agree with him on that. They can come through proper channels, but not illegally.

[Beaker]

(11-26-2018, 07:52 PM)jj22 Wrote: Well when you have it on your door that they are welcomed 

And they are still welcomed if they come legally, not by pushing their way in because they feel they shouldnt have to wait.

[Millhouse]

Just curious, but is leaving poverty a legitimate legal reason for asylum? I always assumed requesting asylum was because of political, religious, or etc. persecution.

Anyways I dont have any issue with how this is being handled. I don't like Trump, but that doesn't mean I want 1000s of people to just stream across our border. Think about the message that would send to the millions in poverty in the Americas, by just letting them all in. I guess I must be racist because eff that. If they want in, get in line like everyone else around the world has to. Not our fault their countries are crapholes.