Donald ('I love the Muslims') Trump: Ban Muslims

[_MeDotOrg]

Just so we're clear, a Trump spokesman said if an American U.S. Citizen who was Muslim traveled outside the Unites States, that person would not be allowed to re-enter the country.

This is the man 38% of Republicans say should be the next President of the United States.

Parenthetical aside: I am semi-retired - I work as a tour guide to keep active. When I'm doing my tours I will often ask people where they're from. Today I asked a young lady where she was from. She looked nervous, and said "The Middle East". When I asked what country, she said "Iraq", and looked at me almost apologetically. I looked her in the eye and said "Welcome!". She visibly relaxed.

I'd just like to point out that her fear is exactly what ISIS and Al Qaeda want to accomplish: to drive a wedge between ALL Muslims and the Western world. Donald Trump is only too happy to accommodate them.

[_MissTish]

Reporter: “Mr. Trump! Mr. Trump!! Can you tell us who you’re wearing?”

Trump: “Hugo Boss”

[_ldsfaqs]

Where's the link? (as Lemmie would so bigotly say).

No need, I can do my own research.
As to the charge, notice you actually didn't include the CONTEXT..... But, such is not new with liberals.

Here's what he also said after that: "...until the nation’s leaders can “figure out what is going on” ".
In other words, it's very smart.

I don't know what is with the liberals obsession with "allowing" a certain amount of "harm" to come to the American people, the country's economy, stability, etc. in the name of "equality" and "saving the world". Be it with illegal immigration (not even legal immigration) be it middle east Refugees that not even their own cultural and religious country's will not let them in, etc.

I mean, liberals for some reason are perfectly fine if a 1,000 "minority's" come in, and that 50 or so of them do violence, many more drain resources, take jobs, etc. etc. I mean, liberals say "there's not enough for the poor"..... then why are they intentionally creating more poor?

Trump is saying what he's saying because he's actually educated. He knows the "checking" system is utter crap as the various professionals involved have said. He knows there's absolutely no reasonable standards on immigration being put in place.... for example only allowing family's, and who have no anti-american/west ideology's, such as embracing Sharia, not allow single men and women unless they can demonstrate that they were on the side of "good", freedom fighters, etc.

YOu all talk about so-called "reasonable gun control" laws..... Good lord.... why don't you feel the same about people, which is who use guns to harm? Guns don't harm, people do. Yet you're perfectly fine will all the south of the border illegals who do harm, refugess for which the majority are likely anti-american leftists, many of whom will do harm, etc.

So, what Trump said was smart..... Until the government (a.k.a. liberals) can get their act together to protect this country first while trying to do the right thing, there SHOULD be a complete halt on Islamic refugees. But, liberals aren't as intelligent or caring about people as they claim. They just want to feel good, not caring about consequences.

[_Lemmie]

Where's the link? (as Lemmie would so bigotly say).

No need, I can do my own research.
As to the charge, notice you actually didn't include the CONTEXT..... But, such is not new with liberals.

Here's what he also said after that: "...until the nation’s leaders can “figure out what is going on” ".
In other words, it's very smart.

I don't know what is with the liberals obsession with "allowing" a certain amount of "harm" to come to the American people, the country's economy, stability, etc. in the name of "equality" and "saving the world". Be it with illegal immigration (not even legal immigration) be it middle east Refugees that not even their own cultural and religious country's will not let them in, etc.

I mean, liberals for some reason are perfectly fine if a 1,000 "minority's" come in, and that 50 or so of them do violence, many more drain resources, take jobs, etc. etc. I mean, liberals say "there's not enough for the poor"..... then why are they intentionally creating more poor?

Trump is saying what he's saying because he's actually educated. He knows the "checking" system is utter crap as the various professionals involved have said. He knows there's absolutely no reasonable standards on immigration being put in place.... for example only allowing family's, and who have no anti-american/west ideology's, such as embracing Sharia, not allow single men and women unless they can demonstrate that they were on the side of "good", freedom fighters, etc.

YOu all talk about so-called "reasonable gun control" laws..... Good lord.... why don't you feel the same about people, which is who use guns to harm? Guns don't harm, people do. Yet you're perfectly fine will all the south of the border illegals who do harm, refugess for which the majority are likely anti-american leftists, many of whom will do harm, etc.

So, what Trump said was smart..... Until the government (a.k.a. liberals) can get their act together to protect this country first while trying to do the right thing, there SHOULD be a complete halt on Islamic refugees. But, liberals aren't as intelligent or caring about people as they claim. They just want to feel good, not caring about consequences.

As Lemmie would so BIGOTEDLY say, you ass! omg, where did you go to school.

[_MeDotOrg]

So ldsfaqs, if Donald Trump signs an executive order banning Muslims from entering the United States, and an American-born Muslim (let's give him a purple heart for pathos) is travelling on business overseas (ah hell, let's say he's building orphanages), you're okay with prohibiting him from entering the only country to which he holds a passport, and reuniting with his wife and children?

[_ldsfaqs]

So ldsfaqs, if Donald Trump signs an executive order banning Muslims from entering the United States, and an American-born Muslim (let's give him a purple heart for pathos) is travelling on business overseas (ah hell, let's say he's building orphanages), you're okay with prohibiting him from entering the only country to which he holds a passport, and reuniting with his wife and children?

1. Strawman alert.... Like I said, he wasn't "banning" Muslims from coming over, just to stop the process until the Government can get his ass in hand.

2. Didn't I talk about "exceptions" in the above post? Nobody has said anything about completely blocking Muslims, especially indefinately.
We simply want some fn intelligence for a change instead of the liberal Laissez-faire.

[_ldsfaqs]

As Lemmie would so BIGOTEDLY say, you ass! omg, where did you go to school.

So, instead of appologizing for being such an unreasonable unfair ass, when I expose you for who you are, you just personally attack again?
Not surprised.

[_MeDotOrg]

1. Strawman alert.... Like I said, he wasn't "banning" Muslims from coming over, just to stop the process until the Government can get his ass in hand.

ldsfaqs, 'stopping the process' is banning. The meaning of ban is to officially or legally prohibit. If a man cannot board an airplane to return to his native country, he is banned from returning home.

There would be pictures of American Muslims stranded in foreign airports. The headlines above those photos will not say Muslims stopped in the process of returning to the United States. The headlines will correctly and succinctly say BANNED.

Now perhaps the Donald is so brave, so brilliant, so strong and such a fearsome leader that he will either solve the entire Muslim dilemma in less than a week or perhaps that the rest of the world will tremble and fall meekly at his feet, but I doubt it.

So the scenario in my previous post, where tearful conversations between the man and his family are flashed around the world is totally possible, unless you think the Trump's Muslim ban will last less than a week.

And if Donald Trump ever institutes this policy, and his lawyers appear in court to defend their actions, how will his lawyers explain how the man in question was given due process? How do they legally justify the suspension of this man's rights as an American citizen?

And ldsfaqs, I don't know if you've noticed, but Trump has about ZERO support from his fellow Republicans on this.

But one thing I have to admit: I've thought Trump has gone beyond the pale time and time again, but the American people keep kicking that darned pale back.

[_Lemmie]

As Lemmie would so BIGOTEDLY say, you ass! omg, where did you go to school.

So, instead of appologizing for being such an unreasonable unfair ass, when I expose you for who you are, you just personally attack again?
Not surprised.

Wait, because YOU said, "As Lemmie would so bigotly say,'
You think I should have to apologize???????????

[_just me]

Lemme get this straight.

Allowing people on the no-fly list to buy firearms= GOOD

Allowing a US Citizen Muslim couple back after their vacay to Cancun= BAD

Am I getting this right?

Profiling millions of people based on religion is smart and safe. Profiling people on the no-fly list is wrong and unfair.