Trump is an asshole, but......

[mistermack]

He's onto a winner with the "ban muslims from coming" thing.

Firstly, why not? Who needs em? And what rights does it actually contravene?
Nobody has a right to move to the US. And the US has a right to choose who it lets in.

Also, politically, it's an obvious winner for him. A majority of voters probably agree with it. And it puts the politicians who speak against it firmly in the "soft on terror" camp.
So right now, it's going to give him a boost in the polls.

But what happens if there's another muslim atrocity? And another?
By election time, he'll be the only one who was on the right side of the argument, if that happens.
Those candidates who denounce the proposal now, are taking a huge risk.

If I was running, I would have got in first with the proposal. And if I hadn't, I wouldn't be denouncing it.
There are no votes in denouncing it at all. If I didn't want it, I'd just say that I was in favour of keeping the option open as a possibility.

[Jason]

It would only serve to radicalize more people - after all it is ok to lie to the kafir.

[laklak]

Big mistake calling to "shut down" the interwebz, though, no one is trading MILF porn for a couple of jihadis.

[cronus]

Watch for a black op from the Tea Party, made to look like a terror attack to swing the election? Unless he croaks from a long word stuck in his throat my money is on a Trump win.

[Blind groper]

According to the United Nations accord on human rights, to discriminate on the basis of religion is wrong. If the US accepts a Christian doctor as an immigrant, and refuses a Muslim doctor because he is a Muslim, that is an offence against basic human rights. Basically, Trump is in the wrong.

[cronus]

According to the United Nations accord on human rights, to discriminate on the basis of religion is wrong. If the US accepts a Christian doctor as an immigrant, and refuses a Muslim doctor because he is a Muslim, that is an offence against basic human rights. Basically, Trump is in the wrong.

Very 20th century of you....let's see who wins the election and what they do with the UN?

[mistermack]

According to the United Nations accord on human rights, to discriminate on the basis of religion is wrong. If the US accepts a Christian doctor as an immigrant, and refuses a Muslim doctor because he is a Muslim, that is an offence against basic human rights. Basically, Trump is in the wrong.

Maybe, to discriminate on the basis of religion IS wrong. For your own nationals.
But foreign people wanting to get into your country, you don't owe them anything.
You can for instance, deny them admittance on the grounds of age. On the grounds of health. On the grounds of criminal convictions. Just one offence of possession of marijuana. And loads of other things.
You can't discriminate against US citizens on those grounds, but you can against would-be immigrants.

[JimC]

mistermack wrote:

...But what happens if there's another muslim atrocity? And another?...

Clever jihadists just might ramp up attacks in America, just to inflame public opinion, get Trump elected, and reap the future rewards when further generations of muslims, suffering from generalised hatred & discrimination, become radicalised and give them more gun fodder...

[Seth]

According to the United Nations accord on human rights, to discriminate on the basis of religion is wrong. If the US accepts a Christian doctor as an immigrant, and refuses a Muslim doctor because he is a Muslim, that is an offence against basic human rights. Basically, Trump is in the wrong.

Not if the discrimination is not based on religion, but upon political affiliation and social and legal practice. That Islam mixes religion with politics is irrelevant. We can ban Muslims who support jihad, sharia law and the Caliphate without discriminating based on religion because those are secular activities and practices not related to worship. All we have to do is present immigrants with documents they must sign after they swear an oath and attest that they abjure, renounce and will never advocate or support any unlawful political, social or legal aspects of Islam, in which case they will be free to worship as they please, but if they try, even once, to impose the political, social or legal aspects of Islam on anyone, including another Muslim, including their wives and children, they get their residency or citizenship revoked and are deported.

We have done the same thing to polygamists and communists before without any legal repercussions so we can do it to Muslims just as easily.

We just have to legislate at the federal level and make advocacy or practice of jihad, sharia law or the establishment of a Caliphate in the US unlawful while leaving religious practices by the individual not involving unlawful acts alone.

Just as the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of any state-sanctioned religion by the government it compels the government to prevent the establishment of any state-sanctioned religion by anyone.

[Seth]

According to the United Nations accord on human rights, to discriminate on the basis of religion is wrong. If the US accepts a Christian doctor as an immigrant, and refuses a Muslim doctor because he is a Muslim, that is an offence against basic human rights. Basically, Trump is in the wrong.

Very 20th century of you....let's see who wins the election and what they do with the UN?

Fuck the UN very much. The United States is a sovereign nation that owes no allegiance to the UN whatsoever. We, the People can repudiate any agreement made by any of our representatives any time we like.

[Seth]

According to the United Nations accord on human rights, to discriminate on the basis of religion is wrong. If the US accepts a Christian doctor as an immigrant, and refuses a Muslim doctor because he is a Muslim, that is an offence against basic human rights. Basically, Trump is in the wrong.

Maybe, to discriminate on the basis of religion IS wrong. For your own nationals.
But foreign people wanting to get into your country, you don't owe them anything.
You can for instance, deny them admittance on the grounds of age. On the grounds of health. On the grounds of criminal convictions. Just one offence of possession of marijuana. And loads of other things.
You can't discriminate against US citizens on those grounds, but you can against would-be immigrants.

Everything except religion, but as I said, Islam is not simply a religion, it is also a political and social model for government and adherents to THOSE aspects of Islam we CAN reject.

[Seth]

mistermack wrote:

...But what happens if there's another muslim atrocity? And another?...

Clever jihadists just might ramp up attacks in America, just to inflame public opinion, get Trump elected, and reap the future rewards when further generations of muslims, suffering from generalised hatred & discrimination, become radicalised and give them more gun fodder...

Appeasement is not an option. Since the intent of Islam is to destroy the United States and install an Islamic system of secular government we have no choice but to destroy any of them who attempt treason or levy war on the United States. If the consequences are more Islamic radicals, well, we'll kill them too and we'll keep right on killing them until they either learn their place and decide to live peacefully within OUR laws, or they are all dead, and I don't care how long that takes.

Muslims are in it for the long haul, and they've been planning and working towards the Caliphate for more than a thousand years, so we must be prepared to spend a thousand years destroying them if necessary.

[mistermack]

Everything except religion, but as I said, Islam is not simply a religion, it is also a political and social model for government and adherents to THOSE aspects of Islam we CAN reject.

I can't see why you're so queasy about religion. Your friends in Israel have banned muslim immigration for years, and had no problem with it.
George Bush practiced positive discrimination. He only attacked Muslim countries. And only tortured Muslims.

What Donald Trump is proposing is just to refuse entry to Muslims. Entry to the US is not a human right.
You might argue that equal treatment is a human right, but then, that would make discrimination on the grounds of all sorts of things out of bounds.
The principle all countries employ is to refuse entry on any grounds that they like. Equal treatment in immigration is not an established human right in any country.

[DaveDodo007]

Big mistake calling to "shut down" the interwebz, though, no one is trading MILF porn for a couple of jihadis.

To be fair he was calling for the shutting down of Islamic State recruitment sites though it was still stupid because every security dept in the Western world is monitoring those sites. The leaders of the Islamic State had to even tell their own troops to stop taking selfies of themselves then posting them on Twitter in newly conquered areas because within hours they were getting a dose of democracy in the form of American high explosive bombs dropping right down on their fucking heads.

[Seth]

Everything except religion, but as I said, Islam is not simply a religion, it is also a political and social model for government and adherents to THOSE aspects of Islam we CAN reject.

I can't see why you're so queasy about religion. Your friends in Israel have banned muslim immigration for years, and had no problem with it.
George Bush practiced positive discrimination. He only attacked Muslim countries. And only tortured Muslims.

Muslim countries were who were attacking us, he didn't attack them because they were Muslim, and while it is true that we CAN discriminate against any particular religion when it comes to immigration, we now do not choose to do so.

What Donald Trump is proposing is just to refuse entry to Muslims. Entry to the US is not a human right.
You might argue that equal treatment is a human right, but then, that would make discrimination on the grounds of all sorts of things out of bounds.
The principle all countries employ is to refuse entry on any grounds that they like. Equal treatment in immigration is not an established human right in any country.

Why grab the religion tar-baby when we have another perfectly legitimate reason to exclude Muslims?