The Trump presidency

Chewbacca we are not all like that, but quite a few are, and it's a case of 'my way or the highway' with them, very liberal and tolerant they are...not!
You are right though, there is no need for it, and today on several threads they have been out in force particularly badly.

Usually when they are struggling to hold up their end of the debate . BUT I'M AGREEING WITH YOU ON THIS DEBATE! Why are you struggling to understand that!

Really Jess? So you can only take part in a politically themed thread if you're willing to be scorned and have every post your make ridiculed? I'm not of the "bluer tinge" whatever that might mean. I don't even disagree with the posts slating Trump, in fact, I've contributed to them. But as Joelsnan said " Only those who can truly debate can do so without personal jibes. The remainder expose their failings." There really is NO NEED for rudeness or unpleasantness on this, or any other thread, whether you agree with other people or not.

'a little tetchy'?? Really?

Chewbacca there are plenty of non-political threads on GN which are I am sure perfectly amicable. Coming onto political threads and then expecting everyone to be in perfect harmony is not realistic.
And if those of a middle ground and left wing persuasion get a little tetchy from time to time (and I've never seen anything worse than tetchy to be honest) those who are of a bluer tinge often resort to cries of "bullying!" "vitriol!" etc. Usually when they are struggling to hold up their end of a debate.

I'm neither left wing nor right wing Ana! I just thought that I'd joined a chat forum to have pleasant discussions, about general topics, with pleasant people. I've never seen such unpleasant, bullying behaviour for no good reason. Absolutely no need for itat all. At this rate, she'll have driven everyone off the thread because they can't be arsed to be bullied by her. Maybe that's her aim?

You get used to it after a while, Chewbacca. Anyone who doesn't automatically agree with the leftwing view gets the vitriolic treatment.

Only those who can truly debate can do so without personal jibes. The remainder expose their failings.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38805196

A much more up-to-date article about the Queen.

Thanks Ana good to know that's it's not just me. I've no idea why she's singled me out for her vitriol, I haven't disagreed with her, although I have queried her on the sources of some of the information that she's posted. Glad I don't come across her in real life!

I have no idea whether the Queen wants Trump as a house guest, a bed partner or a knitting buddy and neither does anyone else, including durham .--even though she'd like to think differently-- . But as everyone else was speculating, which is all any one of us can do, I'm not at all sure why I've caught the vicious side of her tongue. I thought I'd posted on an open forum, not the durhamnet forum.

I'm not paranoid durham. but your rude. There's absolutely no need to be so unpleasant is there? Do you speak to people in real life like that or do you save it for the safety of being behind a keyboard? I have no idea why you ARE so unpleasant but there really is no call for it on this, or any other thread. Try and keep a civil tongue in your head please. And whilst you're at it, read my following post with the update to January 27th.

Don't worry Chewbacca you're not being paranoid, quite a few of us have been subjected to even you's by durhamjen (who is now pretending that she really, really cares what the Queen thinks or feels about Trump or his visit).

theconversation.com/if-the-us-wont-take-refugees-where-do-they-go-72124

This is the position Turkey is in now that Trump has stopped taking refugees from those countries. Most of them are from Syria.
I feel quite ashamed of our government.
Why does May seem to think what happens with Trump is more important than what happens with the Queen?

Paranoia, Chewbacca.
The link you gave was to last November. You must admit that things have changed since then. The Queen might have been happy for the visit to go ahead if things had remained the same, although it doesn't seem to be that she has a say in it.
So why give a link to then, and imply the Queen won't mind having him as a house guest?

That seems to be a fairly unequivocal source, as you say Mawbroon. The link that I looked at was Royal Central which purports to be a website with "bona fide sources"! But, for the benefit of durham, it's still saying, as at 27th January Donald Trump has accepted an invitation from Her Majesty The Queen to visit the UK later this year for a State Visit.

British Prime Minister, Theresa May, confirmed at a press conference that President Trump and the First Lady, Melania Trump, will be travelling to the country later this year."

Your source is probably more reliable though I think.

Hang on a minute durham! What do you mean "Even you must admit things have changed since then"? Are you implying that I'm in favour of Trump visiting the UK? I don't like the "even you" tone of your post at all, it's totally uncalled for and completely wrong. Had you cared to read ANY of my posts fully, you might have gleaned that I am no Trump supporter. I've called him odious, racist, xenophobic and sexist. Surely even you can recognise that those aren't the views of a fan.

Chewbacca Yes, it's interesting in the link I posted to I love Dubai, the derisory comments the Head of Secirity has for some of the 'suspended' countries. Having worked in this region very happily I might say), levels of xenophobia and racism are far far worse than in the west, security checking is extreme and deportations commonplace. However although security checks are applied quite sternly towards Europeans, if their skills are required they are usually let in. No permanent residency though.

Meanwhile a counter petition, by people wanting Trump to visit, has passed the 100,000 signatures required.



Just shows how ridiculous all these petitions are.

And no, I didn't sign either, if anyone wants to know!

Let's be clear about who has actually issued the invitation. This article is unambiguous.

www.itv.com/news/2017-01-30/who-invited-trump-to-uk-and-who-is-exempt-from-his-ban-on-entry-to-us/
If you read through it you will see that the invitation would not have originated at the palace.
"3) No one even tries to suggest that the state visit was the Queen's idea"

That was November 19th, Chewbacca. Even you must admit things have changed since then. May admits the invitation was given by her, not the Queen.
No other US president has had a state visit in the first year.

Agree with you completely Iam64. HM will cope just fine, no matter what.

A date of 20th February has been set for parliament to debate Trumps visit to the UK. Meanwhile a counter petition, by people wanting Trump to visit, has passed the 100,000 signatures required.

I'm not in the least worried about Her Maj and the Trump visit. She's a consulate professional, dedicated to her work and she'll make it work. Whether she likes the man or his politics is irrelevant isn't it.
As I mentioned previously, I did sign the petition. I don't expect it will lead to the visit being cancelled but it is important to voice concern.

November 19th 2016, from Royal Central: ^ The Queen is set to invite US President-Elect, Donald Trump, on an official State Visit to the UK in mid-2017 according to reports.

According to The Daily Telegraph, senior government officials are already writing up plans for the State Visit which promises to be a historic occasion.

Mr Trump will not receive an invitation to visit the UK in an official capacity until he is sworn in as President in January.

If Mr Trump does visit the UK, he is likely to stay at Windsor Castle, partly due to major refurbishment works that will be taking place at Buckingham Palace. ^

So maybe reports of HM horror at having Trump as a house guest is incorrect?