... so are deportations on the table now?

For my daily dose of demagoguery, I decided to listen to Donald Trumps' speech that he gave on the 25th of june 2023. I have to say, I've listened to a lot of his speeches... but this was one of the darkest ones yet. Now, everyone knows the things that he hates and the stereotypes that he uses to make the crowd foam out of their mouths. But this time he went exceptionally hard on immigrants... and "Marxists". I guess he finally dares to say what always follows if you are living with a notion of objective "evil" as your neighbour. There is always a final sollution to this kind of issue.

[quote]You and I have been fighting side-by-side to rescue our country from evil and senator forces that hate -- and cynical forces that hate it. As we gather today our beloved nation is teetering on the edge of tyranny. I believe that. You believe that. Our enemy are waging war on science and religion, on history and tradition, on law and democracy, on god almighty himself. They are waging war. […] The radicals are setting fire to our constitution, abolishing free speech, attacking religious beliefs, erasing our borders, corrupting our elections, and we have corrupt elections. and trying to oppose their creed of "woke" communism on every American, woman and child and that is what they are doing. We have never had a situation like is going on right now in our country […] T[b]ogether we are warriors and a righteous crusade to stop the arsonists, the atheist globalist and the marxists and that is what they are. and we will restore a republic as one nation, under god God with liberty and justice for all.[/b][…]

[...][b]Today I'm announcing a new plan to protect the integrity of our immigration system. Federal law prohibits the entry of communists and totalitarians into the united states.[/b] [applause] [b][u]My question is what do we do with the ones that are already here?[/u][/b] [laughter] [b][u]I think we have to pass a new law for them.[/u] Using federal law, section 212f of the immigration and nationality act, I will order my government to deny entry to all communists, and all marxists.[/b] [applause] Those who come to join our country must love our country. We wouldn't want them when they want to destroy our country. Welcome to America, we want to destroy your country, thank you very much. [b]We will keep foreign, christian-hating communist and marxists out of america.[/b]

[b]We must be strong like never before. We must be unstoppable. Together we will take on the communists and the marxists, and the fascists and the globalists and the fake news media.[/b][/quote]

And when he’s summing up all the big plans he has for his new term:

[quote][…] Because the time is coming up, we will have to extend that to expand the adoption tax credit. We will do that because a lot of people have been adopting and that's a great thing. [b]Another to your already will be to expel the communists, and these terrible people that have taken over our education system.[/b] [/quote]

[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://www.c-span.org/video/?528898-1/donald-trump-speaks-faith-freedom-coalition-conference

... Anyway, if you are intrested in this kind of stuff. You should really take the time to listen to this speech.

If anyone still believes that this man upholds the constitution? Like, you don't have to go to another amendment then the 1st, then to figure out that he and his followers give one f*ck abouth that piece of paper.

And when you are this far to the extreme on the political spectrum, then the word "marxist" becomes just as meaningless as the word "fascist". It's just becomes a collective term, for everything these people don't like.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

BritishFailedAesthetic · M Best Comment

[quote] My question is what do we do with the ones that are already here? [laughter] I think we have to pass a new law for them. [/quote]

Once citizenship has been granted no government should ever have the right to take it away.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@BritishFailedAesthetic During the Cold War the so called western nations used to brag about how they don't do that. That has since changed.

Britain has already made a citizen a stateless person already in the last couple years.

BritishFailedAesthetic · M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow [quote]
Britain has already made a citizen a stateless person already in the last couple years. [/quote]

Yeah, Shamima Begum that was crazy, not going to say who but some Conservative I know who had libertarian values agrees with it.

After pressing them about it- why it shouldn't have been done with IRA members, etc finally the true answer came.

"Well she isn't really British is she".

Racism as I suspected. 😔

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@BritishFailedAesthetic What makes it even more screwed up is she supposedly flipped and was working with Canadian military intelligence as a double agent of sorts.

This will also send the message if you switch sides we will throw you under a bus when you are no longer useful.

And you are right. There is alot of racism involved.

RodionRomanovitch · 56-60, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow 'Britain has already made a citizen a stateless person already in the last couple years.'

Are you talking about Shamima Begum ?

Edit: I see you are.

'she [b]supposedly[/b] flipped' - no she didn't. And neither to this day has she divulged the name of the ISIS arms dealer who 'rescued' her from her halfway house in Syria.

Kwek00 · 41-45, M

@BritishFailedAesthetic Missclicked on the "best comment" tap again... Ah well, Guess you can have it.

But what I wanted to say, is that Donald disagrees with you. It's all in the same speech, when he's talking about his accomplishments:

[quote]During my administration we took steps to improve vetting for legal injury to keep criminals, thugs and terrorists the hell out of our country. [b]We stripped citizenship from those who threatened our security as a nation.[/b] We did social media vetting and created the first ever national vetting center, very successful. we found laws that had never been used before. Including the right to terrorists by the present -- to tarriff by the president. china and other countries paid us hundreds of billions of dollars.[/quote]

BritishFailedAesthetic · M

@Kwek00 I'm not a Trumper so I don't follow what Trump says.

Governments should never have the power to strip citizens of citizenship.

Thanks for unintentional BC.

Kwek00 · 41-45, M

@BritishFailedAesthetic Well, I agree... so does the UN convention on human rights and international law.

But the people we are talking about, don't really recognise these institutions. At that time, it just becomes our opinion vs theirs. That's kind of the issue.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@RodionRomanovitch Interesting you make claims you can't back up. When did you work for Army intelligence or CSIS?

RodionRomanovitch · 56-60, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Even less interesting is the manner in which you just chat shit because it supports whatever the anti-West angle it is that you're pushing on any given day.

I'm not making any unsupported claims. In the BBC documentary ,https://www.bbcselect.com/watch/shamima-the-girl-from-isis/, an ex-Canadian intelligence officer confirms the story that one of its officers was involved in her trafficking. But nowhere in that film is there any mention of your claim that 'she supposedly flipped'. So where did you get that little pearl from ? Do share.

The film also details how she still refuses to divulge the name of the ISIS arms procurer who rescued her from her halfway house and with whom she lived for a period of time. The fact that she is still lying about that and is therefore still considered to be a threat is most likely the determining factor for the British Govt. withdrawing her citizenship.

And another thing you fail to mention is the fact that other British ISIS brides have indeed already been repatriated , which further suggests that there is something uniquely peculiar about the Begum case which led to the government taking such a drastic step.

I'd also be interested to know the provenance of this other claim of yours ; 'During the Cold War the so called western nations used to brag about how they don't do that. ' (i.e. remove citizenship) , which would be very surprising since that particular statute can be found in legislation that dates back to 1914. (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/4-5/17/section/7/enacted).

Can you actually support this assertion ? Or is it just something else you made up ?

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@RodionRomanovitch And great job trying to poison the well with insults right from the start.

None of what you said is true about me but you seem to have a real habit of making excuses for every horrible thing western governments do and take the position that if a NATO member does it that makes it moral by definition.

The person who sent her in country was a CSIS asset. I made a bit of an assumption based on that. Generally speaking anyone recruited by an asset is usually compromised or an informant. That is how such networks normally function.

Unless you are suggesting Canada's version of the CIA just decided to recruit for a terrorist organization?

And it is amusing that you think because the British Government didn't violate UN statutes in other cases (based on your word alone) that magically creates a justification for them doing it against Begam.

And what I said was true. The fact western nations didn't make people stateless was a significant propaganda point during the Cold War.

When certain laws were put into place doesn't really matter.

But sure, go ahead with your endless comments about how western imperialism is magically benevolent.

RodionRomanovitch · 56-60, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow 'I made a bit of an assumption'. - Yes , you did.

'And what I said was true.' - Then prove it.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@RodionRomanovitch I made an assumption based on standard practice and basic logic.

The alternative is CSIS opened a recruiting centre for a terrorist organization. I get logic is not your strong point here but one is more likely than the other.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@RodionRomanovitch Not at all. Not my problem you can't understand what is going on.

I assumed she had flipped or was an informant. That should be obvious. Intelligence agencies don't generally recruit for the enemy.

And I said fuck all about British intelligence. She was involved in a CANADIAN intelligence operation. Clearly I need to spell it out for you.

And it is cute how you assume anyone who provides info helps intelligence agencies gets treated well. So adorably naive.

And I am not going to waste my time with something because you are too lazy to use google.

And the only person pushing narratives are you.

You assume everything done by the west is moral and good and work backwards. Hell you should be paid by both the US and UK government for all the free PR you do.

RodionRomanovitch · 56-60, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow 'And I am not going to waste my time with something because you are too lazy to use google.'

The last refuge of the idiot. lol

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@RodionRomanovitch No, just someone who is not being paid to educate you on basic things like the fact propaganda was used during the cold war or that intelligence agencies don't recruit for the enemy.