-
Posts
6,702 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by snatchslayer
-
-
11 minutes ago, Zambroski said:
Holy shit! You win the internet today my friend. Too funny!
That's actually Hartman and a hot dog left for the birds
-
I'll eat anything. As long as it had parents
-
-
I remember this . And cancer blows donkeys for quarters
- 1
-
3 minutes ago, ckf said:
That's kinda where I am now, too. It's more about enjoying the day with friends
Exactly
-
6 minutes ago, Kevin said:
Yeah I remember being pretty tired and hungry - we didn't stop to eat. The key to big mile days is to leave early and get a lot of miles in before the trails get rough.
I rode with a few guys that were obsessed with getting big miles . Not me. I take my time, enjoy the scenery ,take pics and shoot the shit at the shelters
-
-
9 minutes ago, Turf said:
I find this interesting. All you guys bashing hcs are fucked up. Yes there is some stupid shit that goes on but for the most part alot of good info gets passed on. Shit it seems most of the loud mouth fuck tards on here are left wing liberal fucking wack jobs who probably don't even own a snowmobile and if they do its probably an electric powered pile of tree hugging shit.
Holy shit I ain't sayiin nuthin
-
1 minute ago, Momorider said:
This is current events not months ago events that got shot down in debate so is not even an issue now
I just realized that ..whoops
-
How the fuck is this racist prick so popular and how the fuck does a presidential candidate get on list for being banned from a country
Britain's Parliament Just Debated Banning Donald Trump From the U.K.
Contempt for his anti-Muslim rhetoric turned out to be bipartisan.
- FEARGUS O'SULLIVAN
- @FeargusOSull
- Jan 22, 2016
- Comments
It’s not just in the U.S. that Donald Trump’s campaign for the Republican presidential nomination is making waves. This week the U.K. parliament debated whether or not Trump should be barred from entering Britain—with a depth and seriousness that might surprise outsiders.
The session held on Monday (available in full here) came after outrage over Trump’s recent call for a ban on Muslims entering the U.S. A petition calling for the U.K. to bar him in return gained more than 570,000 signatures, enough under British parliamentary conventions to bring up the subject for debate time. Part of the ire in Britain comes from widespread suspicion that discriminatory policies are already in place at the U.S. border—a concern bolstered by the recent barring of aBritish Muslim family en route to Disneyland.
Monday’s debate in itself is not enough to change policy; no final vote was taken. But it did reveal a high level of hostility in a session where condemnation of Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric turned out to be bipartisan. In fact, as part of an all-around roasting of Trump, the central question boiled down to this: Would banning him from Britain be a stand to protect the country’s minorities, or would it only serve to gain Trump greater publicity?
The pro-ban side had some strong arguments in its arsenal. The U.K. government does, after all, exclude some foreign visitors who it believes risk encouraging hatred. As Scottish National Party MP Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh put it:
"Since her appointment as home secretary in 2010, Theresa May has already banned hundreds of people from the U.K. Her job is quite correctly to protect public safety and promote our security. She has already excluded 84 people explicitly for hate speech. In my view, under her judgment, Donald Trump should be number 85. Using the powers invested in her, Theresa May has already excluded people who include serious criminal, far right extremists, homophobic extremists—and these rules should be applied consistently and equally to all, because if they exist they exist for that reason."
Labour MP Tulip Siddiq insisted on the importance of taking Trump seriously:
“This is a man interviewing for the most important job in the world. His words are not comical. His words are not funny. His words are poisonous. They risk inflaming tensions between vulnerable communities. … It was Donald Trump who ran a dog-whistle campaign against Barack Obama’s birth certificate, to find out whether the president of America was really American. Can you imagine in the mother of parliaments if my colleagues decided to question ethnic minority MPS about whether they were really British?”
Speakers against the potential ban made the point that it risked descending into posture politics, adopting the same tactics as the man himself. As Conservative MP Paul Scully put it:
“I’ve heard of a number of cases where people have been excluded for incitement, for hatred. I’ve never heard of one for stupidity, and I’m not sure that we should be starting now.”
Another conservative MP, Edward Leigh, portrayed the ban as something that could only damage the U.K. to Trump’s benefit:
“This man may conceivably become President of our most important ally. This would play into Mr. Trump’s hands. His entire style of politics is to stoke controversy and to say outrageous things. Lavishing him with attention, even if our attention is to condemn or deride, is falling into the trap he has set for us. … We must beware of lowering ourselves to demagoguery in fighting demagogues.”
Over all this hung the issue of America’s international prestige and the degree to which Trump’s media platform might affect it. Labour MP Paul Flynn was careful to draw a line between condemning Trump and condemning America:
“This is no attempt in any way to disrespect the American state. This is a country of which our cultures have melded together over centuries, getting ever closer. This is a country who sacrificed more of its sons and daughters in the cause of creating democracy in other countries than any other nation on Earth.”
Other MPs weren’t so sure. Conservative Sam Gyimah insisted that rather than being an aberration, Trump’s anti-Muslim stance was really a case of business as usual:
“If Martin Luther King were here today he’d be very surprised at the sugar-coated version of American history [presented here]. I regret to say this … but the exclusion of people on the grounds of race, color, ethnicity is something that has often happened in U.S. history. In that light, Donald J. Trump’s hateful, objectionable views have a history in the American political area … from a long line of nativist legislation. We can object to this, we can decry this, but that is no grounds on which to ban a presidential candidate.”
Beneath the exchange ran an uncomfortable truth: Even if the British public wants a debate, the chances of Donald Trump being stopped from entering the country remain extremely slim. There seems, indeed, to be a growing fear that Trump is someone whom the U.K. and other countries might just possibly need to deal with as a President some day. But although many are starting to realize that might be an outside possibility, that doesn’t mean they have to pretend to like it.
About the Author
MOST POPULAR
- Can China's Futuristic 'Straddling Bus' Finally Become a Reality?
- Why 2014 Marked a Historic Shift in Housing Arrangements
- Explore the Creepy Underground Pedestrian Tunnels of Downtown L.A.
- Geographic Inequality Is Swallowing the Recovery
- Mapping the Incredible Spread of Million-Dollar Homes Across San Francisco
- Watch Colorful Bursts of Commuters From Each U.S. County
- Visualizing 40 Years of the American Diet
- Is Tourism Spoiling Iceland?
- Is FOMO Driving Your Housing Decisions?
- Are Millennial 'Stealth Dorms' Ruining Texas Cities?
-
STORE
T-Shirts, Mugs, and More
GO
-
CITYFIXER
Solutions for an Urbanizing World
GO
Through original reporting, sharp analysis, and visual storytelling, CityLabinforms and inspires the people who are creating the cities of the future—and those who want to live there.
Follow
Newsletter sign up
Today’s Top Stories
This Week’s Most Popular Stories
I want to receive updates from partners and sponsors.
More About CityLab
Elsewhere at Atlantic Media
Copyright 2016 The Atlantic Monthly Group. -
3 hours ago, Mileage Psycho said:
I don't think anybody is pro-abortion, I would imagine that it's the most difficult decision that a woman has to make in her life.
I would think In rape instances I would be pro. But what a decision. Glad I don't have to make it
-
-
200 miles is my top day,and that was on the old tripple lol. Like to keep it around 120 tho 200 kicks my ass
- 1
-
32 minutes ago, SVT Renegade XRS said:
Thats a pretty good one.
Not as good as Cluckeye's video tho.
Good things he's still with us
Holy fuck...that's brutal lol
-
3 minutes ago, SVT Renegade XRS said:
There it is
-
1 minute ago, Axys1 said:
Nope inbreeding its a Minnesota thing.
Good on the adoption stuff tho awesome
- 1
-
-
-
3 minutes ago, Axys1 said:
No worries xcr7 we are not whipping out the joy jelly. I do agree 100% MHC's post.
Damn
13 minutes ago, Mowhawkcat said:I hate cats quality for sure.
We all know their in trouble. But to be honest, I don't wanna see them go out of business.
That means poo and Doo will name their prices and it definitely won't be in our favor.
Cat . I owned one and it was a great sled ,but that was before the Yamaha hand holding bullshit. Agreed on the price shenanigans, less competition is never a good thing
3 minutes ago, Axys1 said:No worries xcr7 we are not whipping out the joy jelly. I do agree 100% MHC's post.
Wtf is with this multiple quote shit
-
Wtf. Secret code ?
-
-
1 hour ago, Capt.Storm said:
I know who she is and I do think there is a place for abortion but that is not what this thread is about really.
These days there are plenty of birth control methods available and yet the rate of abortions are way to high.
You'd have to use birth control in order for it to be effective. People are stupid
-
Pretty cool
-
I saw them in Winnipeg at the forks eons ago. I believe it was Canada day . Kicked ass
Why no Manitoba forum
in Current Events
Posted
Awesome