The Donald Trump Thread

The countries in the travel ban were selected because it is hard to vet people coming from those countries.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/02/a-strange-ruling-from-a-strange-judge.php

The seven countries at issue are: Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and Iran. The first six are all failed, chaotic states that have produced terrorists. The problems with effectively vetting people from these countries are obvious.

The seventh country is Iran. It exports terrorism. Though not a failed state, our relations with the mullahs are such that effective vetting may be well nigh impossible.
 
The countries in the travel ban were selected because it is hard to vet people coming from those countries.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/02/a-strange-ruling-from-a-strange-judge.php
A simple read of this reveals it is nothing but a character assassination of the judge, with no actual evidence of its claims about harder to vet being provided. Second, to act like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan do not export terrorism is laughable. The former has numerous citizens who provide billions in funding for ISIS. The government has also seen fit to export its Wahhabism abroad through the funding of monasteries, teachers, and mullahs. Indonesia is an example of a country that was originally fairly relaxed in comparison to other conservative muslim countries. Now it is increasingly conservative and hardline thanks to Saudi influence. Frankly, Saudi Arabia as a state is a cancer upon the world. Moving to Pakistan. Its border regions with Afghanistan are called the FATA (federally autonomous tribal area).

It is here where numerous al-qaeda cells and training camps are located, and therefore where insurgents would pour across the unchecked afghan border and strike at NATO troops. The Pakistani government has been fairly recalcitrant in sending its troops to deal with these camps. This is why the Obama admin was so ruthlessly using UAVs to destroy these training centres. One because they (insurgents) were inflicting loses on US and coalition soldiers in Afghanistan. Two because the government of their own supposed allies was doing little to help.

Pakistan could also be disaster waiting to happen. It has 200 nuclear weapons stockpiled, and a great fear is that if the government falls to terrorists/extremists, then these people would gain access to these devices. I would be willing to bet that we would see an act of nuclear terrorism in that case, and no amount of vetting would be able to stop it if that happened.

Lastly, I will reiterate that it is far more likely that the ban was driven at least in part by his business interests. Because as has been said several times before. He has millions invested in Saudi Arabia. If he imposed a ban the government could simply come down on this, causing him to lose money. So we have the most powerful man in the world subject to his business interests in a way that directs his foreign policy. And this is just one example.
 
You don't have to be rich to be affected by the regulations. I recently got a home improvement loan and the local banker was complaining to me about all the unnecessary hoops she has to jump through now that merely make it more of a hassle and more time consuming for her.

What pulled us back from the brink was not new regulations, but trillions of liquidity handed to the banks. A few new rules were added so the congressmen could act like they were being tough on banks while giving the banks trillions of dollars in handouts.

The biggest causes of the 2008 crisis were loose Fed policy, the repeal of Glass-Steagal, and derivatives.

Trump has said the repeal of Glass-Steagal was a mistake and that it needs to be reinstated. He's also reportedly interested in a gold backed currency which would handcuff or eliminate the Fed.
I'm sorry, but huge cause was down to predatory loaning by banking corporations providing loans to people who could never afford it. Then these loan were pooled in a way to make them low risk. This gamble of course failed, and when the loan were called in, and people couldn't pay them back, the whole thing collapsed like a house of cards. Ian Gordon posted a better snapshot of this though. Anyway, one cannot say that it was because of government regulation than unscrupulous lenders were forced to give out high risk loans. They knew what they were doing, and they largely got away with it. These unprincipled scum bags helped to destroy millions of lives, and got off scot free. It was unrestrained greed. On that note, a good film to watch is The Big Short, which provides an excellent insight into the crash.
 
Oh, please... This whining from centrist mainstream media is as ridiculous as it is hypocritical. They were, and are, professional liars; yet they still insist that they have a monopoly on "objective truth" and "real facts". What they do have - as well as anyone else - are CLAIMS that have to be compared with, and checked by, claims of independent alternative media, both of "left-wing", "right-wing" and (especially) "beyond left and right" variety. Only by looking at the WHOLE spectrum of sources - no exceptions at all! - one can start building one's own reality-picture, using one's own mind as a principal instrument of construction.

And these guys should stop appealing to George Orwell - whose writings describe totalitarian society where one specific rulers-approved reality-picture is enforced on everyone - and read Robert Anton Wilson istead. Old Bob has described the perspective of the world created by competing reality-tunnels of multiple creative observers - the upcoming ontological (as well as epistemological and axiological) anarchy, and ever-changing polylogue of info-vortex - much better than anyone.
 
S

Sciborg_S_Patel

claims of independent alternative media, both of "left-wing", "right-wing" and (especially) "beyond left and right" variety.
What media is beyond left & right covering US politics?

And these guys should stop appealing to George Orwell - whose writings describe totalitarian society where one specific rulers-approved reality-picture is enforced on everyone - and read Robert Anton Wilson istead. Old Bob has described the perspective of the world created by competing reality-tunnels of multiple creative observers - the upcoming ontological (as well as epistemological and axiological) anarchy, and ever-changing polylogue of info-vortex - much better than anyone.
Could you go deeper into how you see Wilson's writing fitting into the current American political situation?
 
A simple read of this reveals it is nothing but a character assassination of the judge, with no actual evidence of its claims about harder to vet being provided. Second, to act like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan do not export terrorism is laughable. The former has numerous citizens who provide billions in funding for ISIS. The government has also seen fit to export its Wahhabism abroad through the funding of monasteries, teachers, and mullahs. Indonesia is an example of a country that was originally fairly relaxed in comparison to other conservative muslim countries. Now it is increasingly conservative and hardline thanks to Saudi influence. Frankly, Saudi Arabia as a state is a cancer upon the world. Moving to Pakistan. Its border regions with Afghanistan are called the FATA (federally autonomous tribal area).

It is here where numerous al-qaeda cells and training camps are located, and therefore where insurgents would pour across the unchecked afghan border and strike at NATO troops. The Pakistani government has been fairly recalcitrant in sending its troops to deal with these camps. This is why the Obama admin was so ruthlessly using UAVs to destroy these training centres. One because they (insurgents) were inflicting loses on US and coalition soldiers in Afghanistan. Two because the government of their own supposed allies was doing little to help.

Pakistan could also be disaster waiting to happen. It has 200 nuclear weapons stockpiled, and a great fear is that if the government falls to terrorists/extremists, then these people would gain access to these devices. I would be willing to bet that we would see an act of nuclear terrorism in that case, and no amount of vetting would be able to stop it if that happened.

Lastly, I will reiterate that it is far more likely that the ban was driven at least in part by his business interests. Because as has been said several times before. He has millions invested in Saudi Arabia. If he imposed a ban the government could simply come down on this, causing him to lose money. So we have the most powerful man in the world subject to his business interests in a way that directs his foreign policy. And this is just one example.
Agreed, Saudi Arabia is a major problem... unfortunately it's just behind Russia when it comes to oil production. If we upset them, they have the means to do great harm to the USA's allies by slashing oil production. That would throw the USA's allies into the arms of Russia. Saudi Arabia knows this as well as we do, and therefore it's not going to happen. The USA's allies in Europe have done extremely well to reduce hydrocarbon energy consumption over the last decade. But until the the USA can guarantee ongoing supplies to its allies, nothing can really happen to change the situation. However, if the USA was willing to supply its allies from North America's massive unconventional oil deposits, then Saudi Arabia's advantage could be neutralised to some extent. That's one of the reasons why Trumps new USA pipelines are important, they reduce both Saudi Arabia's and Russia's power.
 
Corbett Report: How Trump FIlled The Swamp


With promises to "drain the swamp!" still ringing in our ears, we have watched Trump appoint nothing but Goldman banksters, Soros stooges, neocon war hawks and police state zealots to head his cabinet. Join us this week on The Corbett Report as we examine the swamp-dwellers with which Trump has filled his swamp.
Doug
 
I'm sorry, but huge cause was down to predatory loaning by banking corporations providing loans to people who could never afford it. Then these loan were pooled in a way to make them low risk. This gamble of course failed, and when the loan were called in, and people couldn't pay them back, the whole thing collapsed like a house of cards. Ian Gordon posted a better snapshot of this though. Anyway, one cannot say that it was because of government regulation than unscrupulous lenders were forced to give out high risk loans. They knew what they were doing, and they largely got away with it. These unprincipled scum bags helped to destroy millions of lives, and got off scot free. It was unrestrained greed. On that note, a good film to watch is The Big Short, which provides an excellent insight into the crash.
I agree with you that unscrupulous lenders was a secondary cause, but my understanding is that if Glass-Steagall hadn't been repealed you wouldn't have "investment banks" doing the packaging of mortgages. And if interest rates weren't held so low so long the real estate bubble wouldn't have been created driving a lot of this risky lending.
 

Also like Ikea, it will take harder and longer to build than anticipated as I have found out personally. A few months ago I spent a day putting some of the furniture together. And kept saying, 'this won't take long' how wrong I was ;)
 
Hey! Finally something I strongly disagree with Trump on! Civil Asset forfeiture seizure should require a conviction first. I don't care if it makes things easier for the cartel. Deal with the cartel by legalizing.

But just watch: I predict that Alex Jones and David Knight and others civil libertarian in the alternative realm will be critical of Trump popping off about this, and Trump will get a little more educated about the CAFS issue and do an about face on this just like he did on Torture.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...y-career-texas-state-senator-meeting-sheriffs
 
A lot of the crazyness of these weird times we are living in, by the left and the right, is caused by cynical manipulation of the media, to make the opposition react in ways that make it look bad and to make supporters more emotionally involved in the cause.

http://observer.com/2017/02/i-helpe...aybook-you-should-stop-playing-right-into-it/
I Helped Create the Milo Trolling Playbook. You Should Stop Playing Right Into It.
In this war, there are no good guys.

It's all fake news.

If the article is right about Milo trolling the left in order to sell books, then the people who were injured during the Berkeley riots are blood on Milo's hands.


 
Last edited:
Top