Donald Trump and the Spike in Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes in the U.S.

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Trump MAY be able to convince the right courts to get away with this (he better hope that Obama's Supreme Court nominee doesn't get approved and he gets a chance to appoint one), but it is SO far from American policy, precedent, and the forefathers' intentions that calling it patriotic would be an insult to everything that is American.

Obama won't get to appoint the next supreme court justice, I think we all know that much.

Yes he will.
Republican Senator Admits GOP Will Confirm Obama SCOTUS Nominee If Trump Loses (and he will lose)
But if he doesn't. Well there goes another bastion of our forefathers... Destroying America again at the expense of partisan politics...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

(and he will lose)

Trump will not lose to Hillary. He would probably lose to Sanders, but he will beat Hilldog.

originally posted by: kibric
they spend their effort giving us topics too argue over

Ya know, half these laptop warriors, who are so vociferous in their agreeing/disagreeing of one candidate's views, won't bother getting up off their asses Nov. 8th to vote. If this much effort and empty rhetoric was put towards true change in our ultra-corrupt political system, then we would have better choices than Trump or Clinton. That is all. Go back to your iphones and Kardashian reruns now.

a reply to: Vector99

We'll see about that. Don't forget that Hillary is currently being held back in votes because her support is split between her and Bernie. True there are many polls that have been taken comparing just hillary to donald, but people voted in those polls while still believing that bernie could have a chance. But the fact of the matter is that if bernie ends up leaving the race, almost all of those voters will move over to hillary.

Oh one more thing, many #NeverTrump conservatives are looking to move over to Johnson and the Libertarian party. He recently polled in the double digits for the first time ever (last election he only received 1% of the vote and that was a record). So the possibility of the Libertarian party actually splitting the conservative vote could be real. Especially if some big name conservatives like the Koch brothers recognize this and start putting money behind him.

You don't have to believe me, and granted this election HAS deviated from how many have expected, but the cards are still aligning in the democrats' favor.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Most polls show that most Bernie supporters will vote trump or libertarian in the next election. Not Hilldog.

She won't beat Trump.

False negative narratives like your OP also will not help the Hilldog. Sanders is only running a campaign as a dem because he knows he wouldn't go anywhere otherwise. His supporters also know this.

a reply to: Vector99

Like I said. Believe what you want. I'm done trying to convince your camp of these things. I see some news that I feel is worthy to share so I post it. I try to limit my talks about Trump, because y'all have proven many times over that Trump could shoot 500 babies with an assault rifle in the middle of Times Square and you guys would be lining up to defend him. So I get it. Your messiah is awesome and will change the world. I just don't believe it. I see him for what he is and has always been. A narcissistic, ego driven buffoon who only cares about himself and no one else. Don't worry either, the election didn't shape my opinion of him. I've held that opinion since I first heard his name in the 1990's.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, I simply stated that your OP is biased and disingenuous.

You literally are the reason I support Trump. He makes people freak out and act crazy. Maybe you view it as bad, but I don't, nor do millions of people.

But of course, all Trump supporters are redneck nazi lovers.

So what do you do when the majority of voters elect him? Run from all the fascist ameri-nazis'?

Well don't go to Canada!

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, I simply stated that your OP is biased and disingenuous.

And I've simply ignored you every time you've done so in favor of legitimate points you make.

You literally are the reason I support Trump. He makes people freak out and act crazy. Maybe you view it as bad, but I don't, nor do millions of people.

Good. You'll be one of the people I'll get to say "I told you so" come November. Have fun with that. Are we done with this tediousness now or do you want to continue throwing barbs at each other?

a reply to: avgguy A stepstool won't reach, they are already using a ladder .

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Newsflash, if islam wasn't a problem, you wouldn't have anti muslim issues. Oh and btw how many terrorist incidents have occurred in the past several years worldwide? How about you address those numbers instead of blaming an American candidate that's only been running for less than a year. Try again.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: James1982

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: C8H10N4O2
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Temporary ban until a better vetting system can be put into place.

Irrelevant! It still completely and 100% violates not only the spirit of freedom of religion but also the actual 1st Amendment.

Do you really put the non-existent rights of non US citizens before the rights and lively hood of US citizens???

Do you really put fears over rationality and the principles this country was founded on? Do me a favor and look up the total number of people killed in terrorist attacks since 9/11 in the United States. I doubt you will though.

Furthermore, why should Muslims be admitted anyway? Does the US have a guarantee of admittance to any particular religion? Nationality?

Yes. The 1st Amendment...

What he is proposing is 100% constitutional, and again is backed by the majority of voting US citizens.

You failed Social Studies didn't you?

You don't seem to understand the constitution very well. It applies to US citizens only. Walking into this country does not make you a citizen.

No you don't understand the constitution very well. I've already proven this statement false, but here you go again.
Source

First, the U.S. Supreme Court, in 2008, issued a highly publicized opinion, in Boumediene v. Bush, which, by itself, makes clear how false is the claim that the Constitution applies only to Americans. The Boumediene Court held that it was unconstitutional for the Military Commissions Act to deny habeas corpus rights to Guantanamo detainees, none of whom was an American citizen (indeed, the detainees were all foreign nationals outside of the U.S.). If the Constitution applied only to U.S. citizens, that decision would obviously be impossible. What’s more, although the decision was 5-4, none of the 9 Justices — and, indeed, not even the Bush administration — argued that the Constitution applies only to American citizens. That is such an inane, false, discredited proposition that no responsible person would ever make that claim.
ADVERTISING

What divided the Boumediene Court was the question of whether foreigners held by the U.S. military outside of the U.S. (as opposed to inside the U.S.) enjoy Constitutional protections. They debated how Guantanamo should be viewed in that regard (as foreign soil or something else). But not even the 4 dissenting judges believed — as Susan Collins and other claim — that Constitutional rights only extend to Americans. To the contrary, Justice Scalia, in his scathing dissent, approvingly quoted Justice Jackson in conceding that foreigners detained inside the U.S. are protected by the Constitution (emphasis added):

Justice Jackson then elaborated on the historical scope of the writ:

“The alien, to whom the United States has been traditionally hospitable, has been accorded a generous and ascending scale of rights as he increases his identity with our society . . . .

“But, in extending constitutional protections beyond the citizenry, the Court has been at pains to point out that it was the alien’s presence within its territorial jurisdiction that gave the Judiciary power to act.” Id., at 770–771.

That decision had to do with detainees being held by America. As in, the person is already under/within US control/responsibility. A person applying to be a citizen from another country is not under US control/responsibility and has no connection whatsoever to the US, and no rights afforded to them to come here.

originally posted by: staticfl
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Newsflash, if islam wasn't a problem, you wouldn't have anti muslim issues.

Actually that isn't even close to a true correlation. There are many issues that people think are an issue but really aren't. Propaganda is a powerful suggestive force. So in other words you just made a bandwagon appeal fallacy. "Everyone believes islam is a problem, therefore islam is a problem."

Oh and btw how many terrorist incidents have occurred in the past several years worldwide?

How many terrorist incidents have occurred stateside since 1995? I'll give you some help, I already posted those numbers in this thread a few times.

Try again.

Follow your own advice. This thread has gone on for 19 pages now. Did you really think you were being clever and original with this basic rebuttal?

I hope Donald Trump can get back America from the foreign invaders. The founding father's original dream should not be compromised.

a reply to: NateTheAnimator

He wants to blame TRUMP for a rise in hate crimes but if you even mention Muslim or Islamic and terrorism in the same sentence he has a sissy fit.

Typical liberal hypocrisy and an I'll thought out perspective.

When a religion is responsible for over 4000 deaths on US soil including 14 this past December. They got into this country and should not have. They got in an overstayed. Ft Hood was not workplace violence. It was a Muslim in the US Army who had tied to radical people who was put aside. Turned our cheek and look what happened.

Do you ever turn on the news? Donald Trump is not responsible for Syria...or Iraq...or Libya....and when I see video of those countries or hear the atrocities i am glad I live in the US. And so do good Islamic followers who came to this country to escape the horrors. I will also say that let in all the kids you want. The adult males, they should fight for their own countries.

The idea that Trump is fanning the flames of terrorism sounds an a lot like " A you tube video" is responsible....

this many pages is too many....Your OP is garbage and I gave you the true FBI stats, not what someone decided to write as an article based on their 'study'.

a reply to: onequestion

Why? Why do we have to say Islamic terrorism and not just terrorism? Explain yourself. If it is so obvious that you feel you can casually disparage my character to others, then explain yourself thoroughly, troll.

originally posted by: matafuchs
When a religion is responsible for over 4000 deaths on US soil including 14 this past December. They got into this country and should not have. They got in an overstayed. Ft Hood was not workplace violence. It was a Muslim in the US Army who had tied to radical people who was put aside. Turned our cheek and look what happened.

It's actually around 3500 as I posted earlier in this thread, and 99% of those deaths are from 9/11. Mostly about 10 - 20 people die from islamic terrorism in the united states in a given year. There are things in my bathroom that are more dangerous than islamic terrorism. At least stateside.

a reply to: UnBreakable

Ya know, half these laptop warriors, who are so vociferous in their agreeing/disagreeing of one candidate's views, won't bother getting up off their asses Nov. 8th to vote.

That's right....we should have President Palin by now if we can use ATS as a guide.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

And I've simply ignored you every time you've done so in favor of legitimate points you make.

So I'm confused. You are admitting to being obtuse in general?

You ignored me because of legitimate points I make?

Gotcha...

a reply to: Vector99

No I only responded to points that weren't clearly trollish or overly dismissive in nature. I spent all yesterday getting mad at posters such as yourself for posting the same exact things you think you are being clever by telling me. So I just ignored them because you are too lazy to read the whole thread. They've already been addressed and when you say things like that it drives home the idea that you don't care what I have to say anyways.

If you notice though, I haven't completely ignored you. Just certain posts or parts of posts.