President Trump and Australia PM have 'worst call'

[redred]

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/3DF5/production/_93916851_trumpturnbull.jpg

A phone call between US President Donald Trump and Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull has called into question a refugee resettlement deal.
The Washington Post reported Mr Trump called the conversation "the worst by far" of his calls with world leaders that day, and cut it short.
Mr Trump later tweeted that he would "study this dumb deal".
Struck with the Obama administration, it would see up to 1,250 asylum seekers to Australia resettled in the US.
Australia has controversially refused to accept them and instead holds them on offshore detention centres on the Pacific nations of Nauru and Papua New Guinea.
PM Turnbull had been seeking clarification on the future of the deal after Mr Trump last Friday signed an executive order temporarily barring the entry into the US of refugees and people from seven Muslim-majority countries.

The phone call between Mr Trump and Mr Turnbull took place at the weekend, and was one of four the US president had with world leaders, including Russia's Vladimir Putin.
The Washington Post quotes senior US officials, briefed on the call, as saying that the conversation should have lasted an hour but was abruptly ended after 25 minutes by Mr Trump.

Mr Trump reportedly said accepting the refugees, many of whom are from Iran, Iraq and Syria, would be like the US accepting "the next Boston bombers", who were from the Caucasus region of Russia.

The official version of the call, from both the US and Australia, were more restrained.
On Monday Mr Turnbull said he had spoken to Mr Trump and thanked him for agreeing to uphold the deal.
US presidential spokesman Sean Spicer also said Mr Trump intended to uphold the deal.

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/154DD/production/_93916278_trump.png

Mr Turnbull later said he was disappointed that details of the call - which he described as "very frank and forthright" - had been made public. However, he said Mr Trump had assured him the deal would go ahead.
He told a Sydney radio station that "the report that the president hung up is not correct".

Australia has refused to confirm to the BBC how many refugees it expects to be resettled.
Mr Trump's tweet on Wednesday incorrectly labelled refugees as illegal, and recast the number who might be resettled as "thousands" instead of the official figure of 1,250.
When the deal was first negotiated in November, it was agreed that US authorities would assess the refugees and decide who would be resettled in the US.
The agreement was set to be administered through the United Nations refugee agency.
Australia has been repeatedly criticised by rights groups for its tough policy on refugees and asylum seekers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-38837263

[DemonGeminiX]

Yeah, sorry Australia... we don't want them here either. I don't give a shit what that pussy Obama promised you.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Sorry rest of the world, after 8 years of Obama, the chair behind the desk in the Oval Office finally has someone with balls sitting in it.

[PorkChopSandwiches]

Yeah, Australia is free to take them, they are already there. :fu:

[Griffin]

Trump was definitely the better of what we had to choose from but this mans obsession with twitter...

...well I've said many times that smart phones and social media will be the downfall of human civilization.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Trump was definitely the better of what we had to choose from but this mans obsession with twitter...

...well I've said many times that smart phones and social media will be the downfall of human civilization.

Yeah, that's my biggest complaint about him, just back off on the Twitter postings a bit

[Griffin]

It's kind of like playing poker and there's a mirror behind your chair.
Yet you continue to bluff knowing that everyone including you know that the mirror is there.

[redred]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170203/b7247c97c48707c81ca6b622b8c77783.jpg

[PorkChopSandwiches]

:lol:

[deebakes]

seems like an efficient anti- :wank: device too :lol:

[The Monk]

Yeah, Australia is free to take them, they are already there. :fu:

No they're not - they in off-shore detention as they arrived illegally.

Sad day though when a country makes a deal and then looks at ways to renege - Britain should maybe renege on the US independence and claim it back though god knows they'd want them....




Trump was definitely the better of what we had to choose from but this mans obsession with twitter...

...well I've said many times that smart phones and social media will be the downfall of human civilization.

It's not so much Twitter itself that he is obsessed with but more his own ego that Twitter allows him a platform to expound upon.





Yeah, that's my biggest complaint about him, just back off on the Twitter postings a bit


He's supposed to be running a country not spending his time on Twitter....... Country first.

[lost in melb.]

Yeah, Australia is free to take them, they are already there. :fu:

Hey an agweement's an agweement :fu:

[Muddy]

Britain should maybe renege on the US independence and claim it back though god knows they'd want them....


Britain didn't give us independence, we took it.. Unlike your lot.. :)

[PorkChopSandwiches]

No they're not - they in off-shore detention as they arrived illegally.





Even more reason we dont want them :lol:

[The Monk]

Britain didn't give us independence, we took it.. Unlike your lot.. :)

Couldn't do it by yourselves though could you? Needed the bloody French to help .... :mrgreen:

[DemonGeminiX]

Regardless, we still won our independence, which is a lot more meaningful than having it granted to you by your overlords. :nana:

[The Monk]

We Aussies have a great respect for our Queen but once she has gone, then we will become a republic but not based on the US system. Strictly speaking, we have been independent since Federation on 1901.

[Muddy]

We Aussies have a great respect for our Queen but once she has gone, then we will become a republic but not based on the US system. Strictly speaking, we have been independent since Federation on 1901.


The perfect prisoners.. having respect for the warden! :razz:

[DemonGeminiX]

We Aussies have a great respect for our Queen but once she has gone, then we will become a republic but not based on the US system. Strictly speaking, we have been independent since Federation on 1901.

:-s

Really? If the Queen dies, you guys are gonna drop the monarchy for good? Was that a decision that was made recently or what?

[Hugh_Janus]

Couldn't do it by yourselves though could you? Needed the bloody French to help .... :mrgreen:

nah, I'm pretty sure a couple of farmers did it on their own armed with a knife and a slingshot

[DemonGeminiX]

I think we did it with guns, which y'all tried to take away from us, hence why the second amendment exists. No matter. It doesn't matter who did what. All that matters is that you lost and we won. Period, end of.

[The Monk]

:-s

Really? If the Queen dies, you guys are gonna drop the monarchy for good? Was that a decision that was made recently or what?

It is a very common "belief" in Australia. If America had a president that had engendered such loyalty over 65 years, then you may come close to understanding. :)

[The Monk]

I think we did it with guns, which y'all tried to take away from us, hence why the second amendment exists. No matter. It doesn't matter who did what. All that matters is that you lost and we won. Period, end of.

If the US constitution was written in more modern times, I doubt the gun thing would carry as much weight..... I believe that it may have been a reasonable concession way back when but it has created a massive problem for the country in modern times. Guns lover will of course always disagree but like homosexuality, it can't be cured.... :)



Edit:

Just saw this ITEM (http://www.tehfalloutshelter.com/showthread.php?87580-Customer-shoots-kills-suspected-diaper-thief-at-Wal-Mart) which confirms my belief - baby nappies are worth a life???

[DemonGeminiX]

It is a very common "belief" in Australia. If America had a president that had engendered such loyalty over 65 years, then you may come close to understanding. :)

:hand:

You're totally going to be bowing down to King Charles.


If the US constitution was written in more modern times, I doubt the gun thing would carry as much weight..... I believe that it may have been a reasonable concession way back when but it has created a massive problem for the country in modern times. Guns lover will of course always disagree but like homosexuality, it can't be cured.... :)



Edit:

Just saw this ITEM (http://www.tehfalloutshelter.com/showthread.php?87580-Customer-shoots-kills-suspected-diaper-thief-at-Wal-Mart) which confirms my belief - baby nappies are worth a life???

1st sentence: Don't be too sure about that.

2nd sentence: Guns are not the cause of the problems, you're looking at a surface issue when you should be looking much deeper. And it wasn't a "concession". None of the Framers were against guns.

3rd sentence: Bite me. :nana:

Edit: 'You play stupid games, you win stupid prizes' (Godfather). Even though I don't agree entirely with the shooter's actions, it does not excuse the actions of the other four. The fact of the matter is if the thieves weren't committing a crime that an armed citizen felt the need to intervene in, the criminal that died would still be alive... and probably wouldn't be a criminal, at least for one more day. While I believe there may be some culpability in the shooter's actions, it's probably only 1%. The other 99% lies with the criminals making stupid choices. Blame the four for the one's death. It was their choice to commit a crime and steal, and put themselves in that situation. It's their fault, not the shooter's.

[Hikari Kisugi]

Yeah, that's my biggest complaint about him, just back off on the Twitter postings a bit

Do you seriously expect him to attempt to govern instead?
There will be a long slow realisation of what the man is.
He will argue and bully and make notions, which for a time will buff the US considerably.
It will seem to be working, but once people abroad have been bullied enough, the will move away, and not look back, and then there will be a calamitous fall.
It might even after Trump's tenure, but this path if followed will ultimately be divisive.

[Hugh_Janus]

I think we did it with guns, which y'all tried to take away from us, hence why the second amendment exists. No matter. It doesn't matter who did what. All that matters is that you lost and we won. Period, end of.

talking like you had something to do with it :lol:

[Muddy]

Do you seriously expect him to attempt to govern instead?
There will be a long slow realisation of what the man is.
He will argue and bully and make notions, which for a time will buff the US considerably.
It will seem to be working, but once people abroad have been bullied enough, the will move away, and not look back, and then there will be a calamitous fall.
It might even after Trump's tenure, but this path if followed will ultimately be divisive.

Thanks Nostradamus..

[PorkChopSandwiches]

:lol:

[redred]

Imo both the UK and the US are trying a big experiment and we all need to strap ourselves in for the ride, it may work great or it may fall flat on its face and we might need picking up and cuddling

[PorkChopSandwiches]

Everything will be ok

[redred]

I'm sure it will, but we may as well take the piss in the meantime

[DemonGeminiX]

talking like you had something to do with it :lol:

I'm pretty sure my folks were still in Italy, Germany, Ireland, England, and France at the time. But we were rooting for them... well, all of them except the English nutsacks.

[Griffin]

Discussing gun ownership to someone that allowed their government to neuter theirs is like trying to tell a democrat that their party lost.

[The Monk]

:hand:

You're totally going to be bowing down to King Charles.



1st sentence: Don't be too sure about that.

2nd sentence: Guns are not the cause of the problems, you're looking at a surface issue when you should be looking much deeper. And it wasn't a "concession". None of the Framers were against guns.

3rd sentence: Bite me. :nana:

Edit: 'You play stupid games, you win stupid prizes' (Godfather). Even though I don't agree entirely with the shooter's actions, it does not excuse the actions of the other four. The fact of the matter is if the thieves weren't committing a crime that an armed citizen felt the need to intervene in, the criminal that died would still be alive... and probably wouldn't be a criminal, at least for one more day. While I believe there may be some culpability in the shooter's actions, it's probably only 1%. The other 99% lies with the criminals making stupid choices. Blame the four for the one's death. It was their choice to commit a crime and steal, and put themselves in that situation. It's their fault, not the shooter's.



If there is one thing we have learned about Americans and guns it is that nobody understands the relationship between the two. Something once enshrined in a constitution written for the 18th century has caused untold heartache and pain in the 21st century!!

[The Monk]

Imo both the UK and the US are trying a big experiment and we all need to strap ourselves in for the ride, it may work great or it may fall flat on its face and we might need picking up and cuddling

UK will be fine - I reckon BREXIT is going to be a big plus proved in years to come.

As for America..... Appropriate in my opinion (https://www.awm.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/last_post.mp3)

[The Monk]

http://i.imgur.com/OAHZ0Cs.png


Reference (http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z3t2hv4)

[DemonGeminiX]

If there is one thing we have learned about Americans and guns it is that nobody understands the relationship between the two. Something once enshrined in a constitution written for the 18th century has caused untold heartache and pain in the 21st century!!

When somebody gets killed in an auto accident, you don't blame the car.

[redred]

Not the gun thing again :facepalm: