MicroB

I remember it was much the same talk about the SDP. At least that was a Gang of Four. Reform is still a One Man Band.

Theatre for the masses. There are countries with the death penalty for murder. Murders still occur. Some have the death penalty for adultery. Adultery occurs. As does thieving despite amputaton. It costs El Salvador $2000 per annum to house a convict. The are charging $20,000 per prisoner for the first 300 transferred from the US. That's an ongoing cost. There are 400,000 more to go. There are claims this is cheaper than costs in the US. But this is not true, because there are additional costs when you ship violent prisoners to another country. First there is the issue of the transport. So far, they have used US Air Force transport to take prisoners to El Salvador. In the future, its likely the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System (JPATS), aka "Con Air". They have a fleet of 4 aircraft (2x737-400 and 1 each of 737-700 and -800. These 4 aircraft transport 300,000 prisoners a year within the US. Typically, the flights are 200 prisoners, with 12 marshals (https://www.justice.gov/d9/pages/attachments/2020/02/10/usms_fy_2021_pb_narrative_-_jpats_-_200207_final.pdf) 2021 budget was $70m, probably $100m plus now To expand this to include long haul flights for 400,000, the fleet will likely need to triple in size. And that will also see a big uplift in budget. There are actually prison airports in the US. Going to need a few more of those, to use as reception centers. The analogy is Prison Transports by the UK. When a convict was sentenced to transportation, he wasn't sent down, put on a boat, and away he goes to Australia. What actually happened if he would wait on a prison hulk for upto 7 years, essentially so a convict ship could be fully filled before setting sail All these costs add to the costs per prisoner sent into effective exile (if its expanded to include US citizens). Receiving countries will be compensated on an annual basis, likely consisting of a standing charge, then some calculation based on headcount. How would the US know they are not paying for prisners who have died or have been released, but still claimed for? So they need to set up a system for inspection. But there is a huge potential, over a 20-30 year period, the US will get scammed.

Many years ago I attended the University of Tennessee, and as an overseas student, I attended a briefing from the campus police. The officer wanted to assure the students of the professionalism of the department, which had more stringent enntry requirements than Knoxville police, which was pretty much a high school leaving certificate.

The President's wife was an illegal immigrant, and a communist. When is she being deported? Her Slovenian-speaking son can choose for himself to stay with his mother. Elon Musk also broke immigration rules by using a student visa as a way to illicitly immigrate into the US. Vance's Indian wife certainly need checking to make sure she fully complied, and that she, a Hindu, didn't just marry a strict Christian out of convenience. Question marks over Trump's own mother; a penniless, illiterate Scot, who suddenly found the money to engage in multiple trans Atlantic cruises during a Great Depression, and who made sure she was at all the New York high society parties.

You can Google to find examples of MS-13 tattoos that they use in prosecutions Interesting. Los Angeles gang member plays cricket. But are these tattoos meant to be a proud announcement of your affiliation, or some sort of Mason-like secret sign. ie. if you are caught by a MS-13 gang member, accused of being a member of a rival gang, then, as they start to cut your head off try to explain the cleverness of your knuckle tattoos, and no, its not a cabbage on your fingers, but marijuana, and no, we don't count the ear holes or the nasal septum on a skull as holes, and no, that Cross is supposed to represent 1, not "i" or "t"/

So not serving the Motherland, and letting your fellow citizens do all the dying. How does one renew a Russian passport when one is evading mobilisation?

What do you care, as a Russian? Sort out your own illegal immigration, what with those North Koreans taking the jobs of Russians. I bet none of them have visas. And please define a "legal gang member"; is this a uniquely Russian concept, that in your case you call the President?

The C919 won't be cleared for the EU until at least 2028. To be fair, O'Leary is a troll extraordinaire, a master at the art. Vance should take notes. He's pushing for the rejected Chinese Boeings with a big discount.

Maybe this is what he calls the Colours. Or the Black and White Minstrels.

Since you have the stats at your finger tips: 1. Number of skilled Russians wishing to emigrate to the US 2. Number of skilled Indians wishing to emigrate to the US 3. Number of skilled Chinese wishing to emigrate to the US Who knows why those South Africans want to leave. Jobs and prospects is probably the main reason, in common with the majority of emigrants anywhere in the world. About 5 million Americans choose to not live in America. Why is that? If we are taking a survey of people who "want" to emigrate (as opposed to actually do it), also discuss a similar shonkey survey; https://iasservices.org.uk/the-donald-dash-1-in-4-americans-weigh-emigration-after-trumps-2024-comeback/ 67,000 sounds like a big number, consider the Freedom Front Plus Party, the Afrikaner successor to Volksfront, picked up 220,000 votes at the last election. There are 4.5 million white South Africans. Your anonymous survey indicates 1.5% of White South Africans are thinking about emigration. which in reality means less than 0.5% will follow though. Unless you truely believe 25% of Americans are about to emigrate, Remarkably, the same is quoted for Brits; 23% say wouldn't mind emigrating (https://ifamagazine.com/23-of-brits-plan-to-move-abroad-heres-where-their-money-goes-furthest/). 70% of young Irish want to go (https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/research-70-of-young-irish-people-contemplate-emigrating/) In a Gallup survey, 16% of the globe believe the grass is greener on the other side. In some cases, it is. https://news.gallup.com/poll/652748/desire-migrate-remains-record-high.aspx Of course, the percentages are fairly meaningless, except to indicate that there is a natural human desire to be dissatisfied with their lot. Most on this forum, if not all, fall into that Lot. As do you. If you are a South African, American, Canadian, Australian, New Zealander, in all likelyhood, by current definitions, your ancestors might have been illegal immigrants someplace.

Who are they?

FDA cancels, without notice, critical meeting to select flu serotypes for next season's vaccines. https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2025-02-28/health-experts-sound-alarm-as-fda-cancels-key-vaccine-meeting

In the first quarter of this year, for the first time, China exported more medical instruments to the US, than it imported from the US. Yes, China has been, until recently, a new importer of US medical equipment. Hospitals do need to be buy new stuff. Lots of if, all the time. In manufacturing, the Japanese Just-in-time approach is pretty much universally adopted. US factories have finely tuned supply chains, based on years of trust between companies, where the selection of suppliers is really driven by the needs of the shareholders for a return on their investment. Supply chains cannot be be updated overnight. Ask the Brits about how Brexit worked out, with MINI, Ineos, Honda production. And now Nissan's Sunderland plant is called, by Nissan, no economically viable, largely because of the overnight tariffs that came in during 20-21. Globalisation existed 1870-1913. pax Britannica kept a lid on anything major. John Bull's Britain became an imporrer of Argentinian beef. The decent kids toys were made in Germany. 1914-1945, the world went Protectionist. There was no Pax. Since 1945, the world went back to being globalist, with China and India joining in in the 1970s. Pax Americana kept a lid of anything big. The war in Ukraine is a reminder that all the little conflicts 1945-2020 involving the West were comparatively skirmishes, 20th/21st Century equivalents of taking on the Fuzzy Wuzzies at Omderman. 21st Century war can get a LOT bigger. Now we are all going protectionist again. Imagine being middle aged in 1914, and not knowing then that pretty much your entire life is ruined. Your sons might be off to war, never coming back, your lifelong savings wiped out. Of course you didn't know the future in 1914. All you knew was how good life had been for the last 20-30 years, and be thinking why would anyone want to change that.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/30/trump-100-days-reaction-responses?CMP=share_btn_url

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/29/world/americas/family-deported-trump-venezuela-el-salvador.html Dad deported to El Savadorean Concentration Camp on the basis of skin art, mum sent to Venezuela, daughter somewhere in the US. https://kfor.com/news/local/were-citizens-oklahoma-city-family-traumatized-after-ice-raids-home-but-they-werent-suspects/ ICE agents raid a house, turf out the family in their underwear. Turned out the family were all Americans and not the aliens they were looking for. https://calmatters.org/justice/2025/04/border-patrol-injunction/ Border Patrol rounding up people in a Home Depot carpark. Not far from a Papiere Bitte culture. Corporate pushback: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-new-order-sparks-martial-law-concerns-2065618 The British know, from bitter experience, that the Army is not best placed to do the job of the Police.

https://www.jalopnik.com/1845467/west-coast-port-shipping-declining-tariffs/ West Coast shipping from down 45% Firework orders for next year are being placed now. Next year is the USA's 250th Anniversary. Shortages in stores like Walmart and Target are not only likely but positively baked in. Even if the US and China reached a fantastical agreement tomorrow. Container ships from China take 80 days. This year, kids at Christmas might have to be content with corn dollies and wooden things.

Freudian slip on Truth Social The President's oldest son seem determined to make a fortune; https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/26/donald-trump-washington-club-00311720 I know Lobbying is very different in the US. In England, this practice is known as Cash for Questions.

I thought it was usual for displayed prices in the US not to include sales tax, and resulting in sticker shock at the till. Its a tax. Don't worry, if you buy fake Scotch Whiskey, fake Waygu Beef Steaks, Missouri Champagne, the fake Ferrari kit car, its tax tariff free. No taxation without representation was how the United States started off. This is effectively a consumption tax, not pay for reinvigorated public services, but to transfer national wealth from the pocket of the working man to international bankers, mostly in Japan, United Kingdom, China, Luxembourg and Canada. Article 1, section 8 gives Congress and only Congress the right to levy taxes.

Or to avoid the chances of something going boom in the distance when he reviews the troops accompanied by whatever world leaders who turn up.

Problem is your knwledge of British political history is sadly lacking. Even before the Balfour Declaration, the Labour Party was calling for the establishment of Israel. It was the Conservative Party in the 1920s that adopted the most strident anti-Zionist position. The Labour Party back then had competing Pro-Zionist and Pro-Arab factions. Some in the Fabian society looked at it from a class warfare point of view, and perceived the Arabs as the poor. However, it was Nye Bevin and Michael Foot who in the 1950s established the Labour Party as the most pro-Isreali Party in British politics; remember, this was at a time when many in the British public were still rather ambivalent towards the new country, given the role some of its leadership had in the murder of British soldiers. Michael Foot went so far to say in Parliament to say: The shift occurred in the wake of the 6-day war. You can see that thr switch occurred because of Cold War politics, and a new faction, that included Corbyn and Ken Livingstone, took a more Anti-American view, which meant Pro-Soviet, with the Soviets supporting the Arabs. Until then, the Tories were quite a Israel-sceptic party. The Labour Party had been the natural home of the British Jewish community. With the rise the Anti-Zionist Left, Thatcher saw this as an opportunity to reshape Conservative policy into one that is basically Zionist in nature. Blair and Kinnock notably tried to tone down the voice of that hard left faction; surely your remember the prominance of Gerald Kaufman. But in the wake of the banking crisis, the UK lost its collective mind, with 40% of the vote in the general election going to Corbyn, and 51% of the vote in the Referendum pushing for Brexit. The Conservative Party has nothing to be proud of in its history. Just before the First World War, leading Tories formed the nominally anti-corruption National League for Clean Government, which sounded find until some of them started ranting about "Jewish Plutocracy". After WW1, a successor group emerged, called the Die hards, who were anti-Bolshevik and pushed "Jewish Conspiracy" theories. In the 1920s, immigratipn control occupied the minds of some Tory MPs, leading some of them to complain about posters written in Yiddish appearing in Stepney. All of this intensified throughout the 1920s and 30s. And of course, we all know Lord Halifax's sympathies towards Hitler. Even post war, in the 1945 election, some Conservative Associations were deliberately not choosing Jewish candidates. Even Edward Heath, when Prime Minister, lauched an investigation to "evaluate Zionist influence in the US and Europe". It is completely incorrect to suggest that anti-Semitism is the natural position of the Left, and, by dint, that the Right is pro-Zionist. Both sides have opposing factions, who's dominance and influence shifts with time. And we are stll suffering from the madness of the Banking Crisis in our political landscape, which in many ways has been left "non-British" (we are not a people given to extremism, ever since our blood letting in the Civil War and subsequent Regicide).

I know this is a piss take account, probably run by someone with another forum account, but Gloss reportedly joined the Russian Army because he thought it would get him a Russian passport without having to actually do any fighting. As you imply, its sad that he was apparently an anti-fascist, yet joined a fascist army. No doubt when you referred to him dying heroically, you are referencing him attempting to frag the drunken Russian officer forcing them forward. There is nothing heroic dying for Putin.

The deal struck with El Salvador commits the US to pay $6 million per year per 300 inmates received, so about $20,000 per annum. These are convicted criminals, so will be serving out their aentences, for crimes committed in the US at US expense. Many are in for life, lets assume 20 years for these 300. Now that represents some saving for the US, given the average cost of housing an inmate in the US is about $35,000, but the deal doesn't entirely relieve the US of the cost. But that's only the cost to the US in terms of payments to El Salvador. It doesn't include costs to the US military of providing the flights, plus there will be costs in likely building new US side receiving facilities; transit camps if you will., not to mention legal costs. The reported annual cost of the El Salvador prison system is $200 million. The total prison population is about 110,000. So the actual cost to El Salvador is less than $2000 per year, so this is a sweet deal for the country. No wonder its not willing to send people back The prison they are being transferred to houses at maximum 20,000 inmates. Its disengenous (or idiotic) for you to imply 400,000 inmates can be transferred there. You suggest mass execution is too expensive, Its probably a lot cheaper. The US should consult with China and Iran how they carry this out at a high tempo. I believe China now has mobile execution chambers, and in order to return value to the taxpayer, they run a lucrative organ harvesting programme (subject to screening for infectious disease). Maybe they use rejected organs for pig swill. Iran has ingeniously used commerical construction equipment as mobile gibbets. One issue the US faces is that if death by lethal injection is used, then the materials used need to be cleared by the FDA. This has also lead to problems witj importation of material and equipment, leaving to shortages. The regulatory requirements also adds significantly to the cost. The cost per execution is cited as $3 million per cost, but this reflects the costs of appeals and the various legal processes needed. The cost could be considerably reduced if appeals were eliminated, or adopting the old British system; 1 appeal is allowed, usually within weeks of sentence being passed, and then if unsuccessful, the inmate is dispatched on a date of the prison service's choosing (the prisoner is not given the right to know that date). The attraction of the Iranian approach is that the equipment is fully reusable. In fact, the state can either hire equipment quite easily, or find it has a resale value in the construction trade. In China, reportedly the costs of the execution are fully reimbursed from the inmate's family. Or maybe, just like when every other country does this, its a bit of theatre, and really doesn't achieve much. The long term solution is for the US to start negotiating with countries regarding prisoner exchange programmes, including the US accepting into custody, and honouring overseas punishments, Americans in custody. Not every American is wrongfully imprisoned. Most American inmates are hardened criminals.

You didn't read the whole piece, The OP clearly gave the correct reference in the footnotes.. I suggest you take another look, and withdraw the accusation.

Of which there are many creeds. Muslim Brotherhood islamism, which is the sort Al Qaeda and Hamas picked up, was inspired by, guess what, Nazism. The Quran forms the basis of the law, but like the Bible, that can be interpreted in many ways. Hence Islamic Scholars, So you have two branches of Islam; Sunni and Shia, with the same book, but different views of the law. The Muslim Brotherhood rejects this, and instead, the interpretation of the Quran comes from the street, the "ordinary people", layered with a dose of nationalism, filled in, like the Nazis, with a bunch of historic fantasies (the Nazis had Teutonic Knights and the Volk, Arab Nationalists frequently make up nonsense, but impressive sounding nonsense, about Saladin and imaging sleights. Hence Al Qaeda issued religious edicts based on then thoughts of a college drop out and a wierdo professor. Later on, a convicted drug dealer in Iraq was listened to earnestly by the crowd. I think at one point, Daesh was down to a car mechanic issuing instructions. In early Arab nationalism, it was mostly junior army officers, as coup plotters, who were suddenly experts in the Quran. In Libya, Gaddafi, who promoted himself to Colonel (but never General) came up with his own version, In Gaza, the leaders of Hamas seem to be an rotating list of street thugs, none of whom really have any religious knowledge, but who's authority largely derived from a book in one hand and a gun in the other. Iran is interesting. It is actually a democracy. It holds elections, there are competing political parties, and incumbants do lose elections. There is a President and a Parliament, which on one level function like a western democracy. Indeed the Iranian constitution is modeled on the French constitution which is modeled on the US one. But the Supreme Leader "supervises" the President and Parliament, and he is guided by an appointed by a Guardian Council, made up of Islamic jurists. Like the Supreme Court reviewing every decision made by Parliament, Congress, to check if that decision conforms with the Shia understanding of the Quran. Now, you might end up with a wise and old Supreme Leader who looks dispassionately at these decisions, who will accept or reject decisions, until a better decision is taken, like the function of the House of Lords, except the Commons can abolish the Lords anytime. Or you might have someone with their own agenda "of this Earth". Hezbollah is a political party in Lebanon, that wields constitutional power through the Labanese Parliament, which has been surprising resiliant after all these years (proving how wrong dictators and wannabe dictators are). Hezbollah will never run Lebanon because of then history of that country and its demographic makeup. They boost their support thanks to financial support from Iran that allows them to run a healthcare and social care system on top of whatever the Lebanese government can provide. Notionally, Afghanistan has a similar system of government to Iran, except is Sunni Islam as the basis of law. And its an Emirate. Emir is kind of like King, but more like "Commander in Chief". The Taliban haven't been around long enough to establish hereditary Emirs, so the assumption is when they start popping their clogs due to old age, there will be a tussle for control. But like the Muslim Brotherhood, their power depends on the half arsed understanding of the Quran, but without the political sophistication of European fascism. Over in Iran, the Supreme leader really is an expert in religious law, spending all his life studying it, so is more like a Pope (who actually was a constitutional successor to the Emperor of Rome) and the Archbishop of Canterbury, Syria is the interesting case. The current leader is apparently a temporary leader until they can get the inevitable score settling out of the way. They are still following the secular Syrian constitution. The leader seems to be an ordinary bloke. He is an Islamist, but what that means is hard to discern right now. He's clearly media savvy, knowing when during war, to look like the military commander and all tough, but in peace, getting a haircut, some nice shirts and trousers. He comes over as urbane, and is educated. He seems genuinely focused on his own country, which has suffered a lot, but we will see how long that lasts. We would do well to keep our noses out, and help if asked. I doubt that will happen; too many vested interests in the region. he could probably take some tips from King Abdullah in Jordan, about how to negotiate a tricky path that doesn't involve violent revolt, but also fend off the Turks, the Saudis, the UAE etc. Then we have Syria

Does he want dictatorial powers? Well, he actually said he does. Now, he might say he was joking at the time. But consider his use of Executive Orders; how many of those overturn or over ride existing federal statute? In 2016, in his acceptance speech, he said he alone can address the vital needs of the United States. His recent use of EOs suggests he has moved from that to stating he alone has a mandate to suspend the law in pursuit of his goals. Some of these EOs are now under legal challenge. That he is prepared to issue EIs that conflict with the Constitution, whether or not they are struck down or rescinded, actually does indicate either he is an ignoramus concerning the function of government (which would be worrying, considering all the experience he has gained over the years), or that he does want dictatorial powers. So is he an idiot or a wannebe dictator? https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf In this ruking, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett said: Congress passed a statute that required TikTok to cease operations in the US by January 2025, unless the owners sold the operation to a non-Chinese entity. There was overwhelming support from both parties. Byte Dance appealed and the Supreme Court upheld the law. Then the 47th President, even before he had taken office, urging the Court to stay the effecgive date of the ban. The brief asseted: The Court, rightfully, rejected this request. Congress had lawfully and powerfully passed a federal law. The president cannot overturn that law. But as soon as he was in office https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/application-of-protecting-americans-from-foreign-adversary-controlled-applications-act-to-tiktok/ Trump’s TikTok Order does just simply direct the Attorney General to ignore the statute for a period of time; it does everything it can to declare TikTok’s continued operation entirely lawful during that period, even though the company is now banned by the statute. From 5:21, Senator Tom Cotton, who otherwise does support the President, point out the law is the Law irrespective of the President's wishes. But some mght say TikTik is a trivial matter (even though it actually concerns on one level Freedom of Speech). But whatabout Birthright Citizenship. The existing statutory regime provides for birthright citizenship. This Order is an attempt to overrule that regime, sub silentio. The President thinks its about his reading of the 14th Amendment. But its not, The 14th Amendment only prohibits Congress from denying citizenship to people covered by the Amendment. But Congress has the unquestioned authority to grant citizenship at birth to others who do not fall within the Amendment’s guarantee. Several Congressional statutes guarantee birthright citizenship to children whom the President's Order says are not citizens. The Supreme Court has ruked that the executive branch does not have authority to interpret statutes in contravention of the way they have been interpreted by the courts. And the 14th Amendment has been thoroughly reviewed bynthe courts over many many decades. When the president asserts authority to ignore a federal statute, they must make one of two arguments: they must argue that the statute was beyond Congress’s constitutional authority to enact, or they must argue that the statute interferes with an inherent and exclusive power conferred by the Constitution on the president. Article 1 of the US Constitution gives Congress the exclusive power to decide who is a US citizen and who is not So, another demonstration of dictorial inkling. Some call that Presidential Unilateralism. Same thing. But there are many different kinds of dictator. Is he a or wants to be a fascist dictator? That's getting into the nitty gritty of political creed (he's clearly not a communist), and ultimately, he may have no political creed, so you end up with terms like Peronist, Francoist. Do the question should be, does he want to be an authoritarian or totalitarian dictator. Some call the 47th President an authoritarian populist, https://news.berkeley.edu/2025/01/21/theres-a-term-for-trumps-political-style-authoritarian-populism/ Others call him a "new authoritarian" https://theconversation.com/is-donald-trump-a-fascist-no-hes-a-new-brand-of-authoritarian-241586 Not a fascist. But he's old, and likely dead, disabled in the next few years. What legacy will he leave. And if a Presidency has taken so much power, will it give it back. One is reminded of the Devil's Speech. You might say that you support the present President, that he is well intentioned, that he will leave America in a better place, but what of the next? America is not a one party state, and most people recognise that, and support the idea of a political opposition. Part of that means accepting your chosen party doesn't always win the vote. As civilised peoples, there is a smooth transition of power (another hot topic). Its a system that has served Western democracies very well for hundreds of years. We have complex laws that mostly work well. That they are challenging to unpick protects us all from the reactionary and paniced. The Dictatorial instincts arise because this is how private companies are run, and often how they fail. Before 2016, the current President had zero experience government, national or local. Its at local government that you see democracy really working; people of opposing ideologies actually working together, because, whether you are red or blue, left or right, fixing a pothole, collecting the trqash, is much the same. He's not really had the experience of sitting down with a group of people who disagreed with him, and persuading them to his viewpoint. The closest he has gotten is probably when speaking to the banks for a line of credit. If they don't loan him money, he goes somewhere else until someone does lend him the money, When you've talk of major changes in law, especially if eminating from the Oval Office, it seems Town Hall meetings are the venue for a President to discuss his plans in a way that local people and politicians can understand. It happened last time when there was talk of repealing the ACA. Nothing is happening like that now. In Constitutional issues, the British Prime Minister is one of the most powerful roles in the world. The Prime Minister decides what parliament can debate. So effectively Parliament debates the government's policies every day, and the government has the majority. There is no to little scope for the Opposition to introduce Bills that are contrary to the Government's agenda, unlike the US system. This explains the perception that the US just gets on with things, whoever is in power, but the direction of the British government can radically change every 3-5 years, especially if the government has a very large majority.