You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Smoking Guns wrote:God bless Gov. Cuomo, unlike Deblasio he can call this terrorism.
Muslim is the suspect.
But a citizen. Still, Trump will say we need to keep out refugees, when in fact this person wasn't a refugee. He won't care, and most people won't care. It is what it is and we'll all believe what we want.
My personal belief is Trump is creating enemies for the U.S. at a rapid rate by continually condemning all races/religions with his language. He wants to ban all Muslims, so guess what? All Muslims are going to hate us. He calls all Mexicans rapists and thugs, so they all hate us. It's not good. Very sad, as he might say.
You're right he is a citizen. But how did he become a citizen. Was he someone we admitted during the 12 year war in Afghanistan? If so, should we have admitted him. That's the complaint you aren't recognizing and injecting racism into the conversation as a substitute. Trump's argument is that we should heavily vet people before we allow them in. Have you done any research into how we're vetting this refugees or whatever term you want to give them? We weren't even looking at their social media. In a country that is war torn with no real records, how are we supposed to make sure we're not letting people in who have a history of violence or strongly follow Sharia and will struggle and ultimately lash out once admitted to the US. "17 year olds" with beards longer than the Duck Dynasty guys are being admitted into Europe as minors. When one of these refugees rapes an American, assaults an American, riots in the street or blows up/shoots up a mall, who will be held accountable? Unlike every other sane country, we for the moment grant citizenship to anyone who drops a child on our soil. So once these refugees enter, they only need to breed to have a permanent ticket.
So yes, we should thoroughly vet any person who wants to enter this nation. A single American shouldn't be inconvenienced so someone from a very foreign culture doesn't have to suck it up and defend their country like Americans have been doing since 1776. I'm all for having an open immigration policy, but people coming here should improve America just as much as America improves their quality of life.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
bigbri wrote:Smoking Guns wrote:God bless Gov. Cuomo, unlike Deblasio he can call this terrorism.
Muslim is the suspect.
But a citizen. Still, Trump will say we need to keep out refugees, when in fact this person wasn't a refugee. He won't care, and most people won't care. It is what it is and we'll all believe what we want.
My personal belief is Trump is creating enemies for the U.S. at a rapid rate by continually condemning all races/religions with his language. He wants to ban all Muslims, so guess what? All Muslims are going to hate us. He calls all Mexicans rapists and thugs, so they all hate us. It's not good. Very sad, as he might say.
You're right he is a citizen. But how did he become a citizen. Was he someone we admitted during the 12 year war in Afghanistan? If so, should we have admitted him. That's the complaint you aren't recognizing and injecting racism into the conversation as a substitute. Trump's argument is that we should heavily vet people before we allow them in. Have you done any research into how we're vetting this refugees or whatever term you want to give them? We weren't even looking at their social media. In a country that is war torn with no real records, how are we supposed to make sure we're not letting people in who have a history of violence or strongly follow Sharia and will struggle and ultimately lash out once admitted to the US. "17 year olds" with beards longer than the Duck Dynasty guys are being admitted into Europe as minors. When one of these refugees rapes an American, assaults an American, riots in the street or blows up/shoots up a mall, who will be held accountable? Unlike every other sane country, we for the moment grant citizenship to anyone who drops a child on our soil. So once these refugees enter, they only need to breed to have a permanent ticket.
So yes, we should thoroughly vet any person who wants to enter this nation. A single American shouldn't be inconvenienced so someone from a very foreign culture doesn't have to suck it up and defend their country like Americans have been doing since 1776. I'm all for having an open immigration policy, but people coming here should improve America just as much as America improves their quality of life.
Of course we have to throughly investigate the background of people wanting to take refuge in the United States. If we aren't, that shoudl change.
That's a lot different than banning all immigrants from countries deemed compromised from entering the U.S., deporting everyone here illegally and allowing them to return at a different time.
In this dude's case in NYC, we'll just have to see what his background is. Should he have been denied entry to the U.S. simply because we were at war with terrorists in Afghanistan? That seems to be a stretch. We weren't fighting Afghanistan, just factions within it. What about those born here from illegal immigrants? Can't do anything about that.
I like a lot of what Gary Johnson says about immigration. http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Gary_Jo … ration.htm
Donald Trump is way too reactionary and over-the-top on immigration. The wall is dumb. Mass deportation is Draconian. Profiling is flat-out immoral and probably illegal depending on how you interpret the Constitution.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-800-imm … itics.html
Proving the point I made above. Right now the leadership of the US is more concerned with appeasing liberal, feel good desires than security. Trump will at least make sure we're certain someone isn't going to walk into a shopping mall with C4 as soon as they pass through customs.
3 attacks within 24 hours. Obama has yet to comment, and DeBlassio refuses to acknowledge its terrorism. God forbid we upset a few sensitive people. I take no happiness in this, but I expect to see Trump's numbers rise. Latest polls have him winning the electoral, so let's pray no more incidents occur.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-800-imm … itics.html
Proving the point I made above. Right now the leadership of the US is more concerned with appeasing liberal, feel good desires than security. Trump will at least make sure we're certain someone isn't going to walk into a shopping mall with C4 as soon as they pass through customs.
3 attacks within 24 hours. Obama has yet to comment, and DeBlassio refuses to acknowledge its terrorism. God forbid we upset a few sensitive people. I take no happiness in this, but I expect to see Trump's numbers rise. Latest polls have him winning the electoral, so let's pray no more incidents occur.
That story seems to be about clerical errors and systemic shortcomings, not just granting citizenship for the hell of it.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Don't we racially profile anyway? FBI profilers use race as part of their profiling... I'm really torn on the whole profiling thing. How can you not profile based on race? Its how we track serial killers and domestic terrorists.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Don't we racially profile anyway? FBI profilers use race as part of their profiling... I'm really torn on the whole profiling thing. How can you not profile based on race? Its how we track serial killers and domestic terrorists.
Sure, but it's what you do with the profiling.
Trump is talking about how Israel just rounds up Palestinians indiscriminately after attacks.
If we start doing that in the U.S., that's not really supported by the 4th Amendment as I read it.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
misterID wrote:Don't we racially profile anyway? FBI profilers use race as part of their profiling... I'm really torn on the whole profiling thing. How can you not profile based on race? Its how we track serial killers and domestic terrorists.
Sure, but it's what you do with the profiling.
Trump is talking about how Israel just rounds up Palestinians indiscriminately after attacks.
If we start doing that in the U.S., that's not really supported by the 4th Amendment as I read it.
Yeah, I was going to add that I completely disagree with rounding people up 
I have no problem with profiling or surveillance.... That might put me in the minority, but as long as there's strict oversight to prevent abuse, I have no problem with it.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-800-imm … itics.html
Proving the point I made above. Right now the leadership of the US is more concerned with appeasing liberal, feel good desires than security. Trump will at least make sure we're certain someone isn't going to walk into a shopping mall with C4 as soon as they pass through customs.
3 attacks within 24 hours. Obama has yet to comment, and DeBlassio refuses to acknowledge its terrorism. God forbid we upset a few sensitive people. I take no happiness in this, but I expect to see Trump's numbers rise. Latest polls have him winning the electoral, so let's pray no more incidents occur.
Look at you...reactionary just like Trump. You want our leaders to viscerally react to situations without knowing what they are dealing with.
Blah blah blah blah....white man have the big penis.
You know there's so many things I want to say but I think I'll just leave it short and simple like this, you are a dying breed. You are a generation that is passing and a philosophy that is passing.
Youre shortsighted and provide overly simplistic solutions to everything. You're not as smart as you think you are and you are not someone to be listening to, you provide knee-jerk, simplistic policy ideas. You say you expect Donald Trump to increase in support, it's not going to happen. He's going to fold like a cheap suit. Watch the debates, he's full of bluster and name calling. He's really going to get exposed during the debates. At this point I would pick a wet paper bag over Donald Trump and these types of ideas and policies.
You are alluding or leading people to believe that we don't vet people that come into this country? Have you ever been through customs? Have you ever had a dog sniff your crotch for drugs? Have you not seen people pulled aside and double checked out?
At this point I think I have more in common with foreigners than I do with you therefor you and I will never see things the same. You and Donald Trump are one-of-a-kind.
Remember in Wisconsin when Scott walker completely fabricated that there is rampant voter fraud with absolutely no evidence? This song reminds me of the same bullshit. Now you're going to go site a right wing blog as support for your argument aren't you? Or are you going to find Fox news clippings to support your stance right? Bullshit!
One day you're just going to have to accept that the old way of doing things is slowly dying. No matter how much you get up on your pulpit and beat your chest, these old ideas or dying. Dying a very slow death.
Tell me more about what you expect I'm so fucking interested!
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
In case we forgot, Trump really doesn't think much of the 1st Amendment.
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-first-a … .a3lk00otk
“They’re all talking about it so wonderfully because, you know, it’s called ‘freedom of the press,’ where you buy magazines and they tell you how to make these same bombs that I saw” Trump said. “They tell you how to make bombs. We should arrest the people that do that because they’re participating in crime. Instead they say ‘oh no you can’t do anything, that’s freedom of expression.’”
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
In case we forgot, Trump really doesn't think much of the 1st Amendment.
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-first-a … .a3lk00otk
“They’re all talking about it so wonderfully because, you know, it’s called ‘freedom of the press,’ where you buy magazines and they tell you how to make these same bombs that I saw” Trump said. “They tell you how to make bombs. We should arrest the people that do that because they’re participating in crime. Instead they say ‘oh no you can’t do anything, that’s freedom of expression.’”
Without questioning the source, some material is illegal. Child porn for example. You'll never find someone who loves the 1st Amendment more than me, but where do you draw the line between information and advocating violence? I think that's what Trump is trying to articulate, and obviously Think Progress isn't going to provide any context.
