Yeah that Muslim bann is badly needed
See, that's the thing, if you're targeting Muslims and not doing anything about domestic religious whackjobs, that just a form of racism. There are as many Muslims on Earth as there are Catholics - the radicals comprise a minority of the religion. If they were all terrorists who wanted everyone else dead, everyone else would be dead - there's too many to fight. But clearly, there are many religious people, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, etc, who just live in peace like normal people and want the same for everyone else. THOSE people don't deserve to be punished for the transgressions of the minority.If we're going to do that, Christianity would be the first thing to ban in the US since it's responsible for more of the terrorist attacks on American soil. I'm a nice, peace-loving Christian though. Should I be punished for what the Sovereign Citizens and Christian Identity crowds are doing?
Name one attack on us soil done in the name of Christianity in the last ten years?
July 27, 2008. Jim David Adkisson shoots and kills two people during a childrens' performance of a musical at a Unitarian Univeralist church in Knoxville, Tennessee, telling police that he intended to target individuals who had voted for liberals and Democrats.January 21, 2009. Neo-Nazi Keith Luke rapes and kills an immigrant from Cape Verde in Brockton, Massachusetts, then kills a 72-year-old homeless immigrant.
April 4, 2009. Richard Andrew Poplawski, a frequent poster on the white supremacist Stormfront website who apparently believes a national "gun ban" is imminent, kills three Pittsburgh police officers.April 25, 2009. Joshua Cartwright kills two Okaloosa County, Florida sheriff's deputies. Per a police report, Cartwright's wife says he was paranoid about the U. S. government and "extremely disturbed" by Barack Obama's election.May 30, 2009. Shawna Forde, Albert Gaxiola, and Jason Bush kill a Latino man and his nine-year-old daughter in Arivaca, Arizona during a robbery intended to raise funds for the "Minutemen American Defense" group.May 31, 2009. Scott Roeder kills Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider, in the Wichita, Kansas Lutheran church where Tiller serves as an usher.June 10, 2009. An 89-year-old white supremacist named James von Brunn kills a security guard at the Holocaust Museum in Washington D. C. from point-blank range.
Feb. 18, 2010. Joseph Andrew Stack flies a plane into an Austin, Texas IRS office, killing one person.May 20, 2010. A father-son pair named Jerry and Joseph Kane (who conduct "seminars" about how "sovereign citizens" can evade debt) kill two West Memphis, Arkansas police officers.September 26-October 3, 2011. Avowed white supremacists David Joseph Pedersen and Holly Ann Grigsby kill Pedersen's father and stepmother in Washington, a man they believe is Jewish in Oregon, and a black man in California.*August 5, 2012. A white supremacist named Wade Michael Page kills six people at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin.August 16, 2012. "Sovereign citizen"-movement adherents Brian Smith and Kyle Joekel, who are now awaiting trial, allegedly kill two Louisiana sheriff's deputies in a trailer-park ambush.September 4, 2012. Christopher Lacy, a software engineer who lives in a rural trailer and apparently sympathizes with the "sovereign citizen" movement, shoots a California Highway
June 8, 2014. Jerad and Amanda Miller kill two police officers in a random attack at a pizza restaurant in Las Vegas, then kill a customer at a Walmart. The Millers had spent time on Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy's property during protests related to Bundy's dispute with the federal government.September 12, 2014: Eric Frein allegedly shoots and kills a Pennslyvania state trooper; he's caught 48 days later after hiding from authorities in "survivalist" fashion in a rural area.June 17, 2015. Dylann Roof murders nine people at a historic black church in Charleston, South Carolina.
July 24, 2015: John Russell Houser, a 59-year-old man with a history of expressing extremist and anti-feminist beliefs, kills two women at a screening of the Amy Schumer comedy Trainwreck in Lafayette, Louisiana.Nov. 27, 2015: A 57-year-old religious fanatic named Robert Lewis Dear shoots and kills three people, including a police officer, at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs.March 20, 2017: A 28-year-old white supremacist named James Harris Jackson stabs a 66-year-old black stranger to death in midtown Manhattan.
Not one one in the name of Jesus Christ in fact two of those attacks was done against Christians to further political and ideological aims. It has to be done in the name of Christianity not just happen to be Christian like these gangsters in Chicago.www.google.co.uk/.../story%3Fid%3D44532135
There's more, of course, but there's enough to get you started.I certainly do not condone any terrorist attack anywhere for whatever reason it's committed. No one should be off the hook here. It all has to be stopped, but a Muslim ban will not do much good here, since most of the terrorism here is domestic, and a huge percentage is done by Christian extremists. (There a fair amount done by extreme left-wing groups too.)But in the US, domestic terrorism is a significant issue. Statistically speaking, it's actually immigrants from North and South Carolina who have been most likely to commit terrorist acts in the US. Should we ban them at the borders of other states? Like ALL of them?The deal is, if you look at all terrorist attacks that happen on US soil, say, from 1970 to 2012, only about 2.5% can be attributed to Muslims. 4.9% to Jews, (yes, I was astonished, but JDL used to be pretty bad).
That's exactly the point we have domestic terrorist problems, young men are gunned down in streets so importing hundreds of thousands of young angry men that are easily radicalized and hate America from war zones and sticking them in giant ghettos and handing them welfare is going to create massive problems just like in Europe. It's not a Muslim ban it's a ban on immigrants from certain countries where terrorism and anti Americanism is prevalent ie Syria but not One.
*I may have misread the thing about the Carolinians, and not explained it well. Here's the article:www.slate.com/.../...s_bred_in_north_carolina.htmlIt's meant to be a bit tongue in cheek. But the point is, terrorists come in all colors, sizes and shapes, and ffrom all religious and non-religious traditions. No one religion has a monopoly. It would be great if it was a simple as banning Muslims, but it isn't. And you really can't punish all Muslims for the actions of the minority.Unless you too are prepared to be punished for the terrorist acts of all the people who share your religion, or political party or...see, the list could go on.The people responsible for terrorism are the ones at fault. Not all of the rest of us. The seeds of extremism need to be counteracted wherever they take root - and that means we have to do it here too, with our own people... if we truly mean to end terrorism.
See, the thing is... if you aren't suspicious of every young man who could be radicalized, only Muslims, then it's about being anti-Muslim, not anti-terrorism. Because Muslims don't appear to be any more likely to be radicalized than any other group. No one should ignore real threats, but hyper focus on one theoretical to the exclusion of all others, especially along religious lines A: is to all intents-and-purposes, racist and B: doesn't help make the problem get better.
Islam is not a race so not rascist, to assume skin color due to religion IS rascist. At the moment those that wish death to American are Muslims and the fact that there are so few here, the fact the ones that are here are highly educated mostly and have assimilated as Americans, the fact that most Muslim radicals are in the middle East and Europe is why we have mostly domestic terrorist incidents and gang violence to deal with rather than a huge number of ISIS terror attacks trying to kill as many people as possible. This latest terror attack has a pretty low body count compared to what it could have been in a concert full of kids.
Actually, nothing is a race. Race is a social construct. The prejudices you are exhibiting are generally classed as racism however. But if you'd prefer, I will call it Islamophobia or Xenophobia if that makes you feel better.
You see that's highly offensive to start calling someone one of the ists or phones just because they believe immigration should be controlled, you only have to look at the ghettos liberals created in Europe full of bitter and radical muslims. Naturally after Bush and Obama spending 15 years bombing the shit out of middle eastern Muslims I think it's a bad idea to let in people from that area that hate us.
More offensive than punishing an entire two billion people for the actions of the small minority? Really? Don't want to be called one? Don't be one.
The middle East has a population of 218 million. The proposed travel ban is Iran 79.11 million , Iraq 36.42 million , Sudan 40.23 million , Syria18.5 million , Libya 6.278million , Somalia 10.79 million and Yemen 26.83 million. Obama had the exact same ban while bombing all those countries and you didn't call him a rascist or islamaphobic, why was that?
Egypt 90,253,760 Turkey 78,214,000 Iraq 36,575,000 Saudi Arabia 31,521,000United Arab Emirates 10,000,000 Israel 8,372,000Jordan 6,837,000Lebanon 6,185,000Oman 4,181,00Oman 4,181,000 Kuwait 4,161,000Qatar 2,113,000 Armenia 2,977,000Bahrain 1,781,000All middle eastern countries not on the ban list and all with US friendly governments that aid us and other countries in anti terrorism.Also just to say branding someone rascist, islamaphobic, xenophobic, homophobic, sexist, mysgonistic and the rest simply because you dislike them personally or they disagree with your opinion is wrong and disrespectful to others who were the victims of those things and devalues the power of those words to the point that they mean nothing.
Actually, no, he did not have the same ban.This may help you understand some of the differences between the two:www.politifact.com/.../Bottom line though, we cannot ban Muslims for being Muslims because that's a violation of the US Constitution. We can ban high-risk individuals for being high risk such as known criminals, people who are already radicalized, etc. But banning on religious grounds alone is not something we can do here.Something worthy to note - "no refugee or immigrant from any of the seven countries targeted by the ban has been implicated in any fatal terrorist attack in the United States".And sorry. There's 1.6 billion Muslims, not 2 billion. Mea culpa. I remembered it wrong.
The US constitution applies to US citizens only and would be super fascist to try and enforce on the rest of the world. We are banning based on nationality not religion, if we were all person would have to say was that they weren't Muslim. It's microaggressive to assume a person is Muslim just because they are ethnically middle eastern. We are banning high risk individuals and have been banning them since the 70's. "no refugee or immigrant from any of the seven countries targeted by the ban has been implicated in any fatal terrorist attack in the United States"? Plenty of our citizens have been killed abroad and our embassies attacked ( US embassies are US soil). Also as far as I remember a group of Immigrants from the middle East parked hijacked four planes a few years age, no none are on the list (15 from Saudi Arabia, and the others were from the United Arab Emirates (2), Egypt, and Lebanon) but it shows the importance of immigration control.
Non-citizens, even illegal immigrants, are guaranteed rights under the Constitution. You can go look it up. The Constitution applies to the conduct that US Government is allowed to engage in and the conduct it is not. It doesn't end at the border, or at a non-citizen's passport. It extends to whatever the US Government or its agents do anywhere. It does not apply to how foreign states conduct themselves, only how WE conduct OURSELVES, and I have not suggested otherwise, but nice try derailing.. any way.I'm not assuming everyone from the Middle-East is Muslim. You are the one who called for a Muslim ban. A Muslim Ban isn't constitutional.I haven't suggested any of those terrorist attacks didn't happen, or aren't significant. In fact, I have been careful to state the opposite several times.I have simply indicated that Americans are far more at risk of terrorism conducted by domestic actors, than refugees or other immigrants from outside that US. It's just the stats.
Aaaaand...That if your actual goal is to fight terrorism, you put your time, money and energy into fighting terrorists, not Muslims. Because not all terrorists are Muslim, and not all Muslims are terrorists. (If you're just fighting Muslims, that's called Islamophobia.)
We are fighting shoulder to shoulder with Muslim fighting other Muslims.
Uh.. yeah. And?
So how can it be called islamaphobia? Are the soldiers in the Afgan army Islamaphobic?
I am calling your request for a total Muslim ban Islamophobia. For people in the middle-east, this is domestic terrorism, and they are fighting terrorists, not ALL Muslims.What you are suggesting is "punishing Muslims for being Muslim, because Muslims, duh?" THAT'S Islamophobia. (That's me, paraphrasing your entire point.)Like I said, if you don't want to be called one, don't be one.
I never said anything of the sort. The ban was branded a "muslim" by liberals which is pretty Islamaphobic considering it was a ban on nationality not religion and only a select number of countries who wish "death to America".To deny an islamic terrorist his religion because it's a political and ideological inconvenience to you is islamaphobic."For people in the middle-east, this is domestic terrorism, and they are fighting terrorists, not ALL Muslims." The people fighting terrorists are mostly Muslims fighting other Muslims.No one wants to punish Muslims for being Muslims instead rather we want to protect our own people by limiting immigration just as many Islamic countries in the middle East are currently doing. You should look at the immigration policy if other countries before you start talking about racism, islamaphobic and xenophobia.
This is what you originally said "Yeah that Muslim bann is badly needed"You saying you didn't say that now?You're killing me.
Muslim ban is the common useage liberals have given it which again is Islamaphobic considering it's a nationality ban not a religious one and we are not stopping them from travelling to any middle eastern, European or African country that will host them.
Do you think before the words pour out of your cryhole?
You've revealed yourself to be islamaphobic and rascist. Good day mam.
It wasn't hard to guess
Or because the left promotes radicalism as part of Muslim culture that must be tolerated no matter what. Just look at the Muslim rape gang debacle that leftist councils allowed to prey on young girls for years all across English cities.
That's just it - I see thousands of such accusations but I've seen zero actual evidence of it. If overly apologetic bullshit is so rampant on the Left let's see some actual evidence of it instead of hand wavy concern trolling.
It's well documented and convictions are being made though there is a huge backlog, u only need to type in Rotherham and the first thing Google brings up is Muslim rape gangs
Yeah I googled left apologist Islam and found page after page of right wing complaining but no actual examples...The search continues...
Still not a link. You might as well have said "Internet".Oh wait, you did that too.
www.google.co.uk/.../...ut-Allahu-Akbar-court.htmlThe failure to address the abuse was attributed to a combination of factors revolving around race, class and gender—contemptuous and sexist attitudes toward the mostly working-class victims; fear that the perpetrators' ethnicity would trigger allegations of racism and damage community relations; the Labour council's reluctance to challenge a Labour-voting ethnic minority; lack of a child-centred focus; a desire to protect the town's reputation; and lack of training and resources.Rotherham Council's chief executive, its director of children's services, and the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire Police all resigned.en.m.wikipedia.org/.../Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal
It seems like you're not familiar with the details of that case at all. Nowhere in it, is "the left" saying that this sort of shit needs to be accepted and tolerated. The perpetrators were arrested charged, tried and convicted and given massive jail time.Where oh where is the "we must accept" narrative, that you guys keep claiming the left is shouting?It is all in your heads. It doesn't exist.A couple of politicos who depended on a Pakistani vote to win an election, and were afraid pissing off the Pakistani community, is in no way the same thing as having "the left" going around saying that child brides, gang rape and other sickening acts must be tolerated and accepted.Your claim - "because the left promotes radicalism as part of Muslim culture that must be tolerated no matter what" - not in any way backed up by evidence.
"the Labour council's reluctance to challenge a Labour-voting ethnic minority" you dont get more left than labour obviously you didn't read it.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
Saudi Arabia is held by the royal house of Saud and is a powder keg of islamic extremists that will eventually take control of the country just like in Iran that's why they need the arms. Let's not forget how important Saudi oil is to you personally in your everyday life.
Tomatoe, tomato... Trump only made them the favor.
Saudi Arabia has always bought US arms, I'm sure Obama sold them a lot during his two terms. Did you want him to upset our Muslim allies?
I honestly don't give two shits about Obama, he's a failure and everyone knows it. But for Trump to do the exact same thing, and kiss ass and supply arms to the same people he talks down on... then he's no better. That actually just makes him a hypocrite, and also a funder of terrorism.
Every time you fill up at the gas station doesn't that make you a hypocrite?
I drive German and electric, jokes on you Idiot.
And all the goods you consume drive up and down the autobann are delivered via electric power? Was your electric car brought to the show room by an electric powered lorry? And of course your home is heated by solar power.
If they do it in the name of their religion it's religion.