(03-14-2018 01:39 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-11-2018 01:47 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  This is a Gateway Pundit/Cernovich pushed story. That pretty much spells out whats going on.

Just a "Cernovich story", he said..

Ok, a Cernovich/Gateway Pundit/Nigel Farange story. Who cares? Countries don't have to import extremists. There are any number of American extremists banned from travel to Canada and the UK and many EU nations. Perfectly legal. Now, if you'd like to argue for some coherent and CONSISTENT application of US foreign policy towards human rights, we can do that, but you're not going to have that out of this administration.

(03-15-2018 01:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Ok, a Cernovich/Gateway Pundit/Nigel Farange story. Who cares? Countries don't have to import extremists. There are any number of American extremists banned from travel to Canada and the UK and many EU nations. Perfectly legal. Now, if you'd like to argue for some coherent and CONSISTENT application of US foreign policy towards human rights, we can do that, but you're not going to have that out of this administration.

Right, those are the only 3 people/outlets covering this. She didn't speak in front of the European Parliament yesterday. That didn't happen.

Go ahead and keep doubling down on the notion that anyone who disagrees with you as an extremist. It should certainly end well, politically.

(03-15-2018 01:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 01:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Ok, a Cernovich/Gateway Pundit/Nigel Farange story. Who cares? Countries don't have to import extremists. There are any number of American extremists banned from travel to Canada and the UK and many EU nations. Perfectly legal. Now, if you'd like to argue for some coherent and CONSISTENT application of US foreign policy towards human rights, we can do that, but you're not going to have that out of this administration.

Right, those are the only 3 people/outlets covering this. She didn't speak in front of the European Parliament yesterday. That didn't happen.

Go ahead and keep doubling down on the notion that anyone who disagrees with you as an extremist. It should certainly end well, politically.

LOL. So now you support the European Parliament, where 2 percent support gets you a seat and the ability to whine about not following your interpretations of the 'rules' you don't support administered by a body you don't acknowledge having any authority. Good times.

(03-13-2018 01:04 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 12:50 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I've posted this before, but if I were president, I would make the following statement on the basis of our foreign policy.

We believe in human rights including life, liberty, and property. We will protect your citizens' rights to those things while in the USA, and we expect you to extend the same protections to Americans while in your country. If so, fine. If not, we will have problems, and we will do our best to see that those problems exceed your abilities to cope with them.

Well put, I agree with that stance.

I do too.

I'll just note that the nazi problem that Europeans face is a bit more sensitive than the nazi problem we face in the US, and I think that many of their anti-free-speech laws derive from that.

Secondly, I am worried that Saudi efforts to push "civil rights" laws that make criticizing a religion (specifically Islam) illegal might have been behind these incidents... it would be a massive mistake for western countries to allow the House of Saud to define what civil rights are.

(03-13-2018 12:58 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 12:50 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I believe she is a Canadian citizen, not US, so the same level of response from the US is not prompted. And the "social experiment" that she ran, apparently in France, strikes me as very likely not being as innocent as she describes it. But I do see an alarming trend.
I've posted this before, but if I were president, I would make the following statement on the basis of our foreign policy.
We believe in human rights including life, liberty, and property. We will protect your citizens' rights to those things while in the USA, and we expect you to extend the same protections to Americans while in your country. If so, fine. If not, we will have problems, and we will do our best to see that those problems exceed your abilities to cope with them.

But you're not President. Trump is. And he apparently doesn't care about anyone outside his base.

OK, so what? Other than admitting that right-wing extremists are outside his base, what does your statement mean?

I wasn't expressing Trump's policy, I was expressing what would be mine. That would be the policy that I would support, no matter who was president. And given the choice between a presidential candidate who supported that policy and someone who supported a different one, I would favor the one who supported that policy, although I ultimately might not vote from him/her because of other issues. That was all that I was expressing.

Tommy gave the "banned" speech today at Speaker's Corner to a hero's welcome from HUGE crowd. American, Austrian, Canadian, and Israeli flags were present in honor of those who were banned and couldn't be there, and flown proudly along side the UK and English flags.

The alt-left did what they do (fought with police, wore balaclavas and burqas, attacked people with sticks, screamed "allahu akbar", called people racist, etc.)

VICTORY!