Trump said he might have to close Mosques :D

[Pogo]

facts confuse them.

Facts don't confuse Muslim supremacists. They simply lie about Islam being supreme over the Constitution. They push the notion that even the Constitution must submit to Islam. This is pure lunacy.

EARTH TO MUSLIM SUPREMACISTS: In America, NOTHING is supreme except the Constitution, and the laws of the United States.

And the first item in the Bill of Rights therein is ... what?


DUH.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Trump said he might have to close Mosques

"Might" have to?

There should not be a Mosque opened within a 1000 miles of the US.

 

[ogibillm]

facts confuse them.

Facts don't confuse Muslim supremacists. They simply lie about Islam being supreme over the Constitution. They push the notion that even the Constitution must submit to Islam. This is pure lunacy.

EARTH TO MUSLIM SUPREMACISTS: In America, NOTHING is supreme except the Constitution, and the laws of the United States.

And the first item in the Bill of Rights therein is ... what?


DUH.

he doesn't understand. he somehow believes that the supremacy clause, which in his mind extends to personal beliefs, trumps the first amendment. meaning he thinks that since no law can be made higher than the constitution if people believe in a higher power, say God, their beliefs are illegal.

he's an idiot.

 

[Pogo]

Trump said he might have to close Mosques

"Might" have to?

There should not be a Mosque opened within a 1000 miles of the US.

Apparently in Bizarro World the infamous Reverse First Amendment extends well into Canada, Central America and the Caribbean.

So that's how we got 57 states.

 

[Pogo]

So ---- if a Mexican wanted to build a mosque, but it was a small congregation and they didn't need a big space ---
---- would they call it a mosquito?

 

[Wolfstrike]

"would they call it a mosquito?"

I like it

 

[Flopper]

So you are that dumb.

The Supremacy Clause has nothing whatsoever to donwith religion. Nothing at all. It certainly in no way shape or form makes any religion, including islam, illegal and it certainly does not allow for the closing of mosques.
That you somehow think it does is just idiotic. You would fail any civics class with ridiculous notions like that

I didn't say it had anything to do with religion. I said it has to do with SUPREMACISMS (of which Islam is by far, the largest), most well known, and longest running. You get a ZERO in Constitutional law.

PS-Most people around the world do not accept Islam to be a religion. Neither do some countries (Ex. Italy)

No, the supremacy clause is clearly not a generalized statement about what is supreme. It is quite specific. It is addressing the constitution, federal, state laws, and treaties. When it says federal law and the constitution is the supreme law of land it is clearly stating it takes priority of above other laws. The rules, edicts, and proclamations of religious organization are not recognized as law by the courts and can not be considered as a violation of the supremacy clause.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

 

[ogibillm]

So you are that dumb.

The Supremacy Clause has nothing whatsoever to donwith religion. Nothing at all. It certainly in no way shape or form makes any religion, including islam, illegal and it certainly does not allow for the closing of mosques.
That you somehow think it does is just idiotic. You would fail any civics class with ridiculous notions like that

I didn't say it had anything to do with religion. I said it has to do with SUPREMACISMS (of which Islam is by far, the largest), most well known, and longest running. You get a ZERO in Constitutional law.

PS-Most people around the world do not accept Islam to be a religion. Neither do some countries (Ex. Italy)

No, the supremacy clause is clearly not a generalized statement about what is supreme. It is quite specific. It is addressing the constitution, federal, state laws, and treaties. When it says federal law and the constitution is the supreme the law of land it is clearly stating it takes priority of above other laws. The rules, edicts, and proclamations of religious organization are not recognized as law by the courts and can not be considered in violation of the supremacy clause.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

no no no... don't you see.... if you believe that god's laws are above man's laws protectionist thinks you should be locked away or banished from the country. your beliefs would be illegal, and your church forced to close.

because the supremacy clause, which while maintaining that the constitution is the highest law in the land also manages to somehow trump other parts of the constitution.

and somehow only protectionist has recognized this absolute fact. just ask him.

 

[theHawk]

Donald Trump: 'Strongly consider' shutting mosques - CNNPolitics.com

now we talkin'

...i'm onboard

He says nothing about shutting down mosques, just that certain ones can and should be monitored when intell leads there for terror gatherings.

 

[ogibillm]

Donald Trump: 'Strongly consider' shutting mosques - CNNPolitics.com

now we talkin'

...i'm onboard

He says nothing about shutting down mosques, just that certain ones can and should be monitored when intell leads there for terror gatherings.

nope. he talks about shutting them down. the quote is there in the article.

 

[protectionist]

No, the supremacy clause is clearly not a generalized statement about what is supreme. It is quite specific. It is addressing the constitution, federal, state laws, and treaties. When it says federal law and the constitution is the supreme law of land it is clearly stating it takes priority of above other laws. The rules, edicts, and proclamations of religious organization are not recognized as law by the courts and can not be considered as a violation of the supremacy clause.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Didn't you already state this laughble and VERY OLD talking point in a previous post ? If so, there is no reason to repeat. Posting foolishness once is enough.

And now you're saying that the Supremacy Clause is not a proclamation of Supremacy. I'm laughing too hard to type any more.

 

[protectionist]

nope. he talks about shutting them down. the quote is there in the article.

They never should have been allowed to open in the first place. They are illegal.

 

[ogibillm]

nope. he talks about shutting them down. the quote is there in the article.

They never should have been allowed to open in the first place. They are illegal.

you're still on this?
you're a ridiculous sad idiot. you do not understand the supremacy clause. quit pretending like you do.

but once again, just so you know, islam is not and never will be illegal in the united states. mosques are not and never will be illegal in the united states. your brand of fascism will never take hold no matter how many lies you tell.

 

[ogibillm]

No, the supremacy clause is clearly not a generalized statement about what is supreme. It is quite specific. It is addressing the constitution, federal, state laws, and treaties. When it says federal law and the constitution is the supreme law of land it is clearly stating it takes priority of above other laws. The rules, edicts, and proclamations of religious organization are not recognized as law by the courts and can not be considered as a violation of the supremacy clause.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Didn't you already state this laughble and VERY OLD talking point in a previous post ? If so, there is no reason to repeat. Posting foolishness once is enough.

And now you're saying that the Supremacy Clause is not a proclamation of Supremacy. I'm laughing too hard to type any more.

do you believe god's laws are superior to man's?

 

[protectionist]

no no no... don't you see.... if you believe that god's laws are above man's laws protectionist thinks you should be locked away or banished from the country. your beliefs would be illegal, and your church forced to close.

because the supremacy clause, which while maintaining that the constitution is the highest law in the land also manages to somehow trump other parts of the constitution.

and somehow only protectionist has recognized this absolute fact. just ask him.

So this is what you've been led to believe ? From whom ? MSNBC ? PBS ? NPR ?

"Only protectionist" ? LOL. EARTH TO OGIBILLM; MILLIONS of people know that the Supremacy Clause bans supremacisms (like Islam). I've read dozens of books on Islamization. Every author says that Islam is unconstitutional becasue of its supremacy. (Ex. Shariah: The Threat To America by the Center for Security Policy - a who's who of National Security experts)

http://www.amazon.com/Shariah-America-Exercise-Competitive-Analysis/dp/098229476X&tag=ff0d01-20

I notice that you chickened out from my question in Post # 496. Thought you caould run away from it, huh ? Not hardly. Here it is again >> Do you agree that Islam proclaims its Sharia law (codification of the Koran) to be above the Constitution, and that everything must submit to IT ? (Yes or no)

 

[ogibillm]

So you are that dumb.

The Supremacy Clause has nothing whatsoever to donwith religion. Nothing at all. It certainly in no way shape or form makes any religion, including islam, illegal and it certainly does not allow for the closing of mosques.
That you somehow think it does is just idiotic. You would fail any civics class with ridiculous notions like that

I didn't say it had anything to do with religion. I said it has to do with SUPREMACISMS (of which Islam is by far, the largest), most well known, and longest running. You get a ZERO in Constitutional law.

PS-Most people around the world do not accept Islam to be a religion. Neither do some countries (Ex. Italy)

No, the supremacy clause is clearly not a generalized statement about what is supreme. It is quite specific. It is addressing the constitution, federal, state laws, and treaties. When it says federal law and the constitution is the supreme the law of land it is clearly stating it takes priority of above other laws. The rules, edicts, and proclamations of religious organization are not recognized as law by the courts and can not be considered in violation of the supremacy clause.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

no no no... don't you see.... if you believe that god's laws are above man's laws protectionist thinks you should be locked away or banished from the country. your beliefs would be illegal, and your church forced to close.

because the supremacy clause, which while maintaining that the constitution is the highest law in the land also manages to somehow trump other parts of the constitution.

and somehow only protectionist has recognized this absolute fact. just ask him.

So this is what you've been led to believe ? From whom ? MSNBC ? PBS ? NPR ?

EARTH TO OGIBILLM; MILLIONS of people know that the Supremacy Clause bans supremacisms (like Islam). I've read dozens of books on Islamization. Every author says that Islam is unconstitutional becasue of its supremacy. (Ex. Shariah: The Threat To America by the Center for Security Policy - a who's who of NAtional Security experts)

http://www.amazon.com/Shariah-America-Exercise-Competitive-Analysis/dp/098229476X&tag=ff0d01-20

I notice that you chickened out from my question

what question?
if you've read dozens of books making that claim you need to find books written by more credible and intelligent authors because the supremacy clause has nothing to do with personal beliefs.

i'll ask again, because i know you won't answer - do you believe that god's laws are above man's?

 

[protectionist]

do you believe god's laws are superior to man's?

You answer my question that came first (in post # 496), and then I'll answer yours, which came second.

 

[ogibillm]

do you believe god's laws are superior to man's?

You answer my question that came first (in post # 496), and then I'll answer yours, which came second.

i'm not comfortable speaking for other's faiths, but i do believe that muslims believe that god's laws are above those of man.

however, shariah law is not universal in its content or application. i do believe that muslims believe everyone should be a muslim - just like christians believe everyone should be christian.
your turn.

 

[protectionist]

what question?
if you've read dozens of books making that claim you need to find books written by more credible and intelligent authors because the supremacy clause has nothing to do with personal beliefs.

i'll ask again, because i know you won't answer - do you believe that god's laws are above man's?

You are one for the books. You post my quote WHICH HAS THE QUESTION RIGHT IN IT, and then you ask "what question ?" The one you just quoted, idiot.

And NO, I don't need to do anything you say. The book I linked you is written by the Center for Security Policy - the top national security experts in America. Why do I have to repeat myself to you ? I guess maybe because you are a bullhead Muslim Islamist.

About the Author
LT. GEN. WILLIAM "JERRY" BOYKIN served primarily in Delta Force and Special Forces, then as Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence in the Pentagon.
LT. GEN. EDWARD SOYSTER served as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency during the Panama Invasion and Desert Shield/Storm.
CHRISTINE BRIM was the Chief Operating Officer at the Center for Security Policy.
AMB. HENRY F. COOPER served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force and as Assistant Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and Director of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).
STEPHEN C. COUGHLIN is a specialist on Islamic Shariah Law, Islamic doctrine and ideology, and the strategic information, international law, and intelligence.
MICHAEL DEL ROSSO served as CEO and CTO of large public companies and early stage companies. He is a Lincoln Fellow at The Claremont Institute and Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Policy.
FRANK GAFFNEY is the Founder and President of the Center for Security Policy. He acted as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy.
JOHN GUANDOLO is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, an Officer in the Marine Corps and a former Special Agent at the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
BRIAN T. KENNEDY is President of the Claremont Institute.
CLARE M. LOPEZ is a a senior fellow at the Center for Security Policy and vice president of the Intelligence Summit.
ADM. JAMES "ACE" LYONS is was Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet.
ANDREW C. MCCARTHY was an assistant US attorney in the Southern District of New York, and in 1995 he led the terrorism prosecution against the "Blind Sheikh" for the first World Trade Center bombing.
PATRICK POOLE is one of the nation's leading analysts on issues related to the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorist activities in the United States.
JOSEPH E. SCHMITZ served as the fifth Senate-confirmed Inspector General of the Department of Defense. TOM TRENTO is the Director of United West.
J. MICHAEL WALLER is Vice President for Information Operations at the Center for Security Policy.
DIANA WEST is a columnist and the author of The Death of the Grown-Up: How America's Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization.
R. JAMES WOOLSEY served as the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency(1993-95).
DAVID YERUSHALMI is General Counsel to the Center for Security Policy.

 

[protectionist]

i'm not comfortable speaking for other's faiths, but i do believe that muslims believe that god's laws are above those of man.

however, shariah law is not universal in its content or application. i do believe that muslims believe everyone should be a muslim - just like christians believe everyone should be christian.
your turn.

So you admit that "muslims believe that god's laws are above those of man" That's what I've been saying all along. Muslims insist on their Sharia law as being above the laws of man (the US Constitution) That's what makes Islam illegal. In America, NOTHING is allowed to be above the Constitution.

"This Constitution and the Laws of the United States...shall be the Supreme Law of the Land" (Article 6, Section 2)