Trump said he might have to close Mosques :D

[TheGreatGatsby]

Why doesn't the media get all over Hillary Clinton for saying stupid sh** like she'd go after gun manufacturers?

Because they are in the tank for her and agree with her. But just because they are wrong on that doesn't mean trump is right for wanting to shut down a Muslim house of worship.

Is he wrong? The Constitution makes pretty clear that seditious entities can and should be stamped out. He's not even calling for that though; he's just saying we should know our enemy.

 

[Kondor3]

...Islam is a religion...

That won't matter, if they're deemed too dangerous to be accommodated any longer.

...What you may not realize is that Homeland Security is very dependent on members of the Muslim communities stepping forward...

Then I suggest that they step-up their efforts by an order or two of magnitude, before such cooperation becomes too-little, too-late.

If they are deemed too dangerous, then they should be arrested, tried in court, and punished. Closing mosques would alienate millions of Muslims in the US who condemn terrorist acts and would make ISIS job of recruiting much easier.

No, if they're too dangerous, then they should lose the disguise of religion, and be treated like any other secular organization of a hostile nature.

 

[Kondor3]

Right up until the moment that SCOTUS declares that Islam is not a religion......

Why do you waste your time on such self-indulgent, childish emoting?

Because it pisses you off, .....

All you've evoked is pity for being such a fool.

 

[Flopper]

Why doesn't the media get all over Hillary Clinton for saying stupid sh** like she'd go after gun manufacturers?

Because they are in the tank for her and agree with her. But just because they are wrong on that doesn't mean trump is right for wanting to shut down a Muslim house of worship.

Is he wrong? The Constitution makes pretty clear that seditious entities can and should be stamped out. He's not even calling for that though; he's just saying we should know our enemy.

No one is saying members of a mosque should be shielded from arrest or prosecution. If there are members planning, or supporting terrorist activities, they should be arrested and prosecuted. We don't deny people the right to assembly and worship God because others of that faith are criminals, at least not in the United States.

 

[Flopper]

...Islam is a religion...

That won't matter, if they're deemed too dangerous to be accommodated any longer.

...What you may not realize is that Homeland Security is very dependent on members of the Muslim communities stepping forward...

Then I suggest that they step-up their efforts by an order or two of magnitude, before such cooperation becomes too-little, too-late.

If they are deemed too dangerous, then they should be arrested, tried in court, and punished. Closing mosques would alienate millions of Muslims in the US who condemn terrorist acts and would make ISIS job of recruiting much easier.

No, if they're too dangerous, then they should lose the disguise of religion, and be treated like any other secular organization of a hostile nature.

I would say it a person(s) are that dangerous, they should be in jail. Denying Muslims a place of worship accomplishes nothing other than creating a backlash that could easily lead to more terrorist acts and less cooperation with law enforcement.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Why doesn't the media get all over Hillary Clinton for saying stupid sh** like she'd go after gun manufacturers?

Because they are in the tank for her and agree with her. But just because they are wrong on that doesn't mean trump is right for wanting to shut down a Muslim house of worship.

Is he wrong? The Constitution makes pretty clear that seditious entities can and should be stamped out. He's not even calling for that though; he's just saying we should know our enemy.

No one is saying members of a mosque should be shielded from arrest or prosecution. If there are members planning, or supporting terrorist activities, they should be arrested and prosecuted. We don't deny people the right to assembly and worship God because others of that faith are criminals, at least not in the United States.

That's a lovely feel good speech you gave. You should run for Democrat lawmaker.

Now for a reality check: Muslims' so-called faith is criminal. Their book calls for your death.

 

[Pogo]

Why doesn't the media get all over Hillary Clinton for saying stupid sh** like she'd go after gun manufacturers?

Because they are in the tank for her and agree with her. But just because they are wrong on that doesn't mean trump is right for wanting to shut down a Muslim house of worship.

Is he wrong? The Constitution makes pretty clear that seditious entities can and should be stamped out. He's not even calling for that though; he's just saying we should know our enemy.

No one is saying members of a mosque should be shielded from arrest or prosecution. If there are members planning, or supporting terrorist activities, they should be arrested and prosecuted. We don't deny people the right to assembly and worship God because others of that faith are criminals, at least not in the United States.

That's a lovely feel good speech you gave. You should run for Democrat lawmaker.

Now for a reality check: Muslims' so-called faith is criminal. Their book calls for your death.

This is always fun.....

Link?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Why doesn't the media get all over Hillary Clinton for saying stupid sh** like she'd go after gun manufacturers?

Because they are in the tank for her and agree with her. But just because they are wrong on that doesn't mean trump is right for wanting to shut down a Muslim house of worship.

Is he wrong? The Constitution makes pretty clear that seditious entities can and should be stamped out. He's not even calling for that though; he's just saying we should know our enemy.

No one is saying members of a mosque should be shielded from arrest or prosecution. If there are members planning, or supporting terrorist activities, they should be arrested and prosecuted. We don't deny people the right to assembly and worship God because others of that faith are criminals, at least not in the United States.

That's a lovely feel good speech you gave. You should run for Democrat lawmaker.

Now for a reality check: Muslims' so-called faith is criminal. Their book calls for your death.

This is always fun.....

Link?

Give it a rest, asshole.

 

[regent]

No one answered my question: Is Trump going to close all mosques or just those in the United States?

 

[Pogo]

Because they are in the tank for her and agree with her. But just because they are wrong on that doesn't mean trump is right for wanting to shut down a Muslim house of worship.

Is he wrong? The Constitution makes pretty clear that seditious entities can and should be stamped out. He's not even calling for that though; he's just saying we should know our enemy.

No one is saying members of a mosque should be shielded from arrest or prosecution. If there are members planning, or supporting terrorist activities, they should be arrested and prosecuted. We don't deny people the right to assembly and worship God because others of that faith are criminals, at least not in the United States.

That's a lovely feel good speech you gave. You should run for Democrat lawmaker.

Now for a reality check: Muslims' so-called faith is criminal. Their book calls for your death.

This is always fun.....

Link?

Give it a rest, asshole.

Translation: "Hey Rocky! Watch me pull some bullshit out of my ass!"

 

[Kondor3]

...Islam is a religion...

That won't matter, if they're deemed too dangerous to be accommodated any longer.

...What you may not realize is that Homeland Security is very dependent on members of the Muslim communities stepping forward...

Then I suggest that they step-up their efforts by an order or two of magnitude, before such cooperation becomes too-little, too-late.

If they are deemed too dangerous, then they should be arrested, tried in court, and punished. Closing mosques would alienate millions of Muslims in the US who condemn terrorist acts and would make ISIS job of recruiting much easier.

No, if they're too dangerous, then they should lose the disguise of religion, and be treated like any other secular organization of a hostile nature.

I would say it a person(s) are that dangerous, they should be in jail. Denying Muslims a place of worship accomplishes nothing other than creating a backlash that could easily lead to more terrorist acts and less cooperation with law enforcement.

If it comes to such a sorry state, that will be only the first step - the next (and last) would be an Edict of Expulsion -like decree - ala Spain or England, centuries ago.

I seriously doubt that it will get that far out of hand, but God knows what the future holds, if Militant Islam remains unchecked.

 

[longknife]

Here's the Mosques Trump Would Probably Scrutinize

“Islamist extremists have developed a sophisticated network of interconnected organizations across American,” according to Clarion. “The common thread among these organizations is their ideology of political Islam, which aspires to implement sharia governance and to establish a global Islamic caliphate.”

The original story I read comes from Doug Ross @ Journal: Here's a Map of Nearly 100 Radicalized Mosques in the U.S. with a link to Caution! You May Live In The Radical Mosque Zone

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump also wants Muslims to be required to register with the government AS Muslims.

Finally Godwin's law can be thrown under the bus because Trump is beyond all reasonable doubt proposing Nazi policies.

No movement is more similar to Nazism than Islamism.

Nazism was our enemy, not our friend, dumbass.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Unconstitutional.

Get the Supreme Court to rule that Islam is not a Religion and that all goes away...

What world are you from? The conservatives on the Court have already determined that your religion is what you say your religion is.

The world which recognizes that Rulings from Era A are oftentimes overturned by Rulings from Era B.

Rule that Islam is not a religion and then what? Rule that freedom of assembly does not apply to Muslims? Rule that the entire Bill of Rights and all other protected rights in the Constitution do not apply to Muslims?

That you even believe that is feasible makes you the dumbest **** on this board.

 

[Toro]

Religious repression has always been of American society.

 

[longknife]

Religious repression has always been of American society.

If you feel that way, move somewhere else!

 

[Kondor3]

...Rule that Islam is not a religion and then what?...

Once shorn of its Constitutional protection of Freedom of Religion, it becomes extremely easy to shut down its manifestations and activities, as needed.

...Rule that freedom of assembly does not apply to Muslims? Rule that the entire Bill of Rights and all other protected rights in the Constitution do not apply to Muslims?...

No need.

Shorn of its protections, it merely need be subsequently declared as a dangerous and hostile activity...

No citizen of any type may engage in activities dangerous and hostile to the Nation, for long, without sanction.

...That you even believe that is feasible makes you the dumbest **** on this board.

Oh, it's "feasible" alright.

But whatever-in-the-world leads you to believe that I, in turn, believe that such an approach is in our long-term best interests?

I merely show you the future, in the event that Militant Islam becomes more trouble than it's worth to accommodate, on our own shores.

It doesn't take a lot to toss-out the Constitution, or an aspect of it, with respect to Group A or B, when The Republic becomes endangered.

Just ask the Confederate sympathizers whose lives were altered by Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeus corpus in the opening months of the US Civil War, or just ask the Japanese-Americans interned throughout WWII, well within Living Memory, if you need further proof that this is not only possible but all TOO feasible.

I despise and mistrust Islam in general, I do not want us to take-in even one Syrian refugee, and would probably laugh, if somebody nuked Mecca, or Tehran.

Nolo contendere.

But I did not advocate stripping Muslims of their Constitutional right to practice their faith.

Rather, I merely and quite happily stated the legal approach that would be required, in order to overcome barriers to shutting them down.

You confuse an amused counterpointing of naivete with actual advocacy, and simply make assumptions, rather than seeking clarification, before condemning.

The TRUE measure of a "dumb phukk" - or, at the very least, a serious lapse in judgment, or a very good impression of a "dumb phukk". Damned funny stuff, that.

In truth, you're not very good at this, are you?

 

[longknife]

I have not read ANYWHERE where Trump or any GOP candidate has said anything about SHUTTING DOWN or CLOSING a mosque.

What I HAVE read is that some mosques that preach treasonous actions should be monitored and investigated.

 

[Flopper]

Why doesn't the media get all over Hillary Clinton for saying stupid sh** like she'd go after gun manufacturers?

Because they are in the tank for her and agree with her. But just because they are wrong on that doesn't mean trump is right for wanting to shut down a Muslim house of worship.

Is he wrong? The Constitution makes pretty clear that seditious entities can and should be stamped out. He's not even calling for that though; he's just saying we should know our enemy.

No one is saying members of a mosque should be shielded from arrest or prosecution. If there are members planning, or supporting terrorist activities, they should be arrested and prosecuted. We don't deny people the right to assembly and worship God because others of that faith are criminals, at least not in the United States.

That's a lovely feel good speech you gave. You should run for Democrat lawmaker.

Now for a reality check: Muslims' so-called faith is criminal. Their book calls for your death.

Not so

 

[Flopper]

...Islam is a religion...

That won't matter, if they're deemed too dangerous to be accommodated any longer.

...What you may not realize is that Homeland Security is very dependent on members of the Muslim communities stepping forward...

Then I suggest that they step-up their efforts by an order or two of magnitude, before such cooperation becomes too-little, too-late.

If they are deemed too dangerous, then they should be arrested, tried in court, and punished. Closing mosques would alienate millions of Muslims in the US who condemn terrorist acts and would make ISIS job of recruiting much easier.

No, if they're too dangerous, then they should lose the disguise of religion, and be treated like any other secular organization of a hostile nature.

I would say it a person(s) are that dangerous, they should be in jail. Denying Muslims a place of worship accomplishes nothing other than creating a backlash that could easily lead to more terrorist acts and less cooperation with law enforcement.

If it comes to such a sorry state, that will be only the first step - the next (and last) would be an Edict of Expulsion -like decree - ala Spain or England, centuries ago.

I seriously doubt that it will get that far out of hand, but God knows what the future holds, if Militant Islam remains unchecked.

From your last sentence, do I understand that you don't believe all Muslims militant?