# Europe Laments, "Trump is Right"



## Mrs. M.

The anti-Islam protest group, Pegida, is growing in number as unprecedented reports of rape, murder and theft flood the EU. Massive anti-Islam protests have exploded across Europe with a message for the American people: Trump is right.

Donald Trump warned early on that the Muslim refugee crisis could trigger the end of Europe. Afterward, the GOP front runner was targeted by Muslim apologists in the UK, who initiated a petition demanding Mr. Trump be banned from Europe. Reports later surfaced that most of the signers were Muslims.

In a recent interview with French media, Trump said, “The French should have been allowed to bear arms and protect themselves. Mr. Trump added, “I've been to Bataclan before. If I had been at Bataclan, I would have opened fire.” 89 people perished at the Bataclan after Islamic terrorists opened fire inside the theatre.

Officers who entered the Bataclan during the massacre were not permitted to report on camera what they had seen. Police union spokesman, Nicolas Comte recounted their story to the BBC.

Inside Bataclan, they heard the sound of gunfire as hostages continued to be executed. Pleas for help from within went unanswered because the specially trained police had to neutralize the shooters before saving anyone.

“They thought they were walking in water, then realized it was blood,” Comte said. They had to step over bodies as they made their way in the dark. After killing the terrorists, the police witnessed bodies piled up on top of each other. One officer reported, “We really saw hell tonight.”

Europe is in crisis. Trending today one news headline reports: Syrian Crisis: 15 million refugees headed for Europe and rebels blame Britain. While the number may have been exaggerated, the danger for Europe is not.

UN bureaucrats have demanded that Turkey open its borders to the tens of thousands gathered at the border. Some informed Europeans are calling the UN mass immigration policy, “pre-planned chaos.”

“They deliberately engineered the migrant crisis by toppling all the secular dictators who were essentially the “dams of Europe” holding back (and containing) radical Islam within their own countries, according to one source. He asks, “Was it not highly suspicious that the Arab Spring happened in countries directly controlling land and sea borders into Europe?

Why was it only those countries and not other Islamic nations? The reason is obvious, he states. It was the deliberate destruction of the dams of Europe, a precursor to a migrant invasion. The source cites Peter Sutherland, special representative to the UN on mass migration, as the man who is responsible.

While Sutherland protects Muslim immigrants as if they were an endangered species, he is void of any concern for the citizens of Europe. Peter Sutherland is a senior member of Bilderberg who identifies himself as an internationalist.

Bilderberg leader, Etienne Davignon has been called the man behind the formation of the EU while Sutherland has been named, the father of globalism. One report noted that the UN is using the EU to flood Europe with immigrants in order to destabilize European countries and erase Christian and national identity. Some people believe it is time to exit the EU and have created a website to inform citizens. Home  Political leaders are also weighing in on the discussion.

​

Prior to his death, Libyan leader Gaddafi said, “If I go down, Europe goes black."
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/...warned-europe-if-i-go-down-europe-goes-black/

Gaddafi was right. Apparently this is why the UN targeted Libya but how did they get away with using the US Military to accomplish their destabilization plan of the ME?

Congress never authorized our military to destabilize Libya, Egypt or Syria. The UN did. This is on record as Senator Jeff Sessions questioned Leon Panetta about who granted the US military permission to go to war. Leon Panetta told the Senator that the UN granted permission. This is in direct violation of our US Constitution and War Powers Act. Seeking permission from the UN rather than Congress is not acceptable.

​
As European countries awaken to the realization that they need to withdraw from the EU, Americans must understand that withdrawing from the UN is the right course of action. We must protect our own sovereignty and constitutional rights.

Donald Trump warned the American people that there are “bad people” out there who want to do things that are not in the best interest of America.

Europe laments, "Trump is right."
Trump _is _right. On that, we must agree.

_______________
HUNDREDS of Protesters Carry "TRUMP IS RIGHT" Signs at First PEGIDA Rally in England - The Gateway Pundit
SYRIA CRISIS: '15 million MORE refugees head to Europe'... and rebels say BRITAIN to blame


----------



## JakeStarkey

This is a false OP, so noted and reported.  The OP correctly should be, "
*Pegida Laments, "Trump is Right"*


----------



## Valerie

i'm sure those people holding signs wouldn't have any interest in causing more division in America.


fyi individuals with signs are not countries.  or continents. now you know


----------



## S.J.

They're right, Trump IS right.


----------



## Valerie

oh look, Westboro Baptist Church agrees with Trump too!  amazing...


----------



## S.J.

Valerie said:


> oh look, Westboro Baptist Church agrees with Trump too!  amazing...


And muslims agree with Obama, what's your point?


----------



## oldsoul

Is anyone accually going to state that Europe is NOT being destablized? That IS what is happening, anyone who thinks this will not happen here is delusional. It can and it will, unless we do something to stop it...


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Valerie said:


> i'm sure those people holding signs wouldn't have any interest in causing more division in America.
> 
> 
> fyi individuals with signs are not countries.  or continents. now you know



     Just like muslims signing a petition doesnt represent the UK.


----------



## oldsoul

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> 
> i'm sure those people holding signs wouldn't have any interest in causing more division in America.
> 
> 
> fyi individuals with signs are not countries.  or continents. now you know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like muslims signing a petition doesnt represent the UK.
Click to expand...

 Thanks, wasn't aware of that... Pardon the sarcasm. Couldn't resist. LOL


----------



## Tommy Tainant

I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing. Many signed in support of Muslim friends.
In all honesty Trump isnt taken seriously over here. He is seen as a bit of a joke.
This might change if his campaign progresses.
Ultimately the people of America are too bright to elect a clown.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.


 To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.


----------



## Correll

oldsoul said:


> Is anyone accually going to state that Europe is NOT being destablized? That IS what is happening, anyone who thinks this will not happen here is delusional. It can and it will, unless we do something to stop it...




Tell it to the women of Cologne and the children of Rotherham.


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing. Many signed in support of Muslim friends.
> In all honesty Trump isnt taken seriously over here. He is seen as a bit of a joke.
> This might change if his campaign progresses.
> Ultimately the people of America are too bright to elect a clown.




Any new rape rings?


----------



## JakeStarkey

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
Click to expand...

Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
Click to expand...

Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
Click to expand...

 Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
_According to merriam-webster:_
*Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
Does that clear things up for you?


----------



## Correll

JakeStarkey said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
Click to expand...



YOu make a fair point.

Trump has no right to travel to Britain as he is not a citizen there.

Thus it is NOT fascist to Ban him.

If the Hate Law speeches I hear of are used to prevent people who are citizens from speaking the ideas that Trump has, *that* would be fascist.

Meanwhile, the thousands of children victimized in the various rape rings, I hope appreciate how much care is being given to keep in place the Political Correctness that led to them being raped and tortured.

And is no doubt, leading to more children being raped and tortured, if not now, then in the very near future.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

JakeStarkey said:


> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.



Islam is a totalitarian political ideology  viciously opposed to the notion of free speech,  demands absolute conformity, micromanages people's lives down to the iota and seeks to destroy all other ways of life. In that, it shares much in common with fascism.   Tommy Taint's role here is to defend this totalitarian ideology and share it's hatred of any criticism of Islam.  In that, he shares qualities with fascism.

  True fascism is a far right ideology, of course, and Tommy Taint is a far leftist, but the net result is a boot stamping upon a human face forever in either case.


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
Click to expand...


Like people who support and enable Rape Rings?


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
Click to expand...

Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.

You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
> _According to merriam-webster:_
> *Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
> Does that clear things up for you?
Click to expand...

I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.


----------



## JakeStarkey

"Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you."

Fallacy of false equivalency is well represented above.

The great majority of Muslims don't do violence.

Religion cannot be a basis in America for banning people.  If it were, we would have gotten rid of the Presbyterians long time ago.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
Click to expand...

The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
> _According to merriam-webster:_
> *Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
> Does that clear things up for you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.
Click to expand...


Trouble?

LIke you lefties having to defend the results of your policy of Third World Immigration?


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
Click to expand...



How do you know that?

We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".

No matter how horrible the crimes.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you."
> 
> Fallacy of false equivalency is well represented above.
> 
> The great majority of Muslims don't do violence.
> 
> Religion cannot be a basis in America for banning people.  If it were, we would have gotten rid of the Presbyterians long time ago.


 So, we should just let everyone in no matter if we can vet them properly or not. Great formula for total destruction of the country. You must really hate it here.

I am so sick and tired of liberals and progressives saying that we cannot protect ourselves. If we cannot protect ourselves then maybe we should just erase all borders and have a new one world government. Oh, wait, that is what you want, no borders, no individuality. That is what this is really all about. NO INDIVIDUALITY. If we where all just the same we would be so much better off. Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, Nazis, Communists, Facists, great bunch of folks there.

Why won't the American left just be honest? If you really think your ideas are better, then just come out and say what they are, and stop trying to make everyone who disagrees with you out to be villans? What makes your ideas so great? Why will they work now?

False equivalent fallacy? NEVER SAID THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE VIOLENT. All I said was there is a group of people who are bent on descruction of our way of life. I didn't say who they were, I didn't say where they are. I said THAT they are. If you insist on putting words in my mouth, then just shut the go somewhere else to do it. I, for one, will no longer tolerate it. If you cannot make your arguement without such tactics then your arguement is not valid. 

What do you propose we do? And don't just spew some crap about how we can vet them already. The Syrian government can't even vet the Syrians. How the hell do you think we can?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Correll said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that?
> 
> We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".
> 
> No matter how horrible the crimes.
Click to expand...

Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
> _According to merriam-webster:_
> *Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
> Does that clear things up for you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.
Click to expand...

 True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Tommy Tainant said:


> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.




Says the one who votes to prevent people from entering the U.K. for disagreeing with his own goose-stepping form of political fundamentalism.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

 WHAT? Has Trump killed someone? Maybe your "muslim freinds" haven't either, however, there are those muslims who have. Until we can distinguish who has and who has not, I say we let none of them in. Would you let a bunch of strangers into your house, not knowing if one of them is planning to kill you? I doubt it. This is common sense, something that is in short supply in the EU as of late.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> 
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that?
> 
> We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".
> 
> No matter how horrible the crimes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.
Click to expand...

 You cannot just go around "defending" your position with attempted slander. Doesn't hold up. If you have a REAL arguement, state it. Otherwise, please keep your slanderous comments on YOUR side of the pond.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> 
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that?
> 
> We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".
> 
> No matter how horrible the crimes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot just go around "defending" your position with attempted slander. Doesn't hold up. If you have a REAL arguement, state it. Otherwise, please keep your slanderous comments on YOUR side of the pond.
Click to expand...

Slander ?


----------



## Dogmaphobe

oldsoul said:


> WHAT? Has Trump killed someone? Maybe your "muslim freinds" haven't either, however, there are those muslims who have. Until we can distinguish who has and who has not, I say we let none of them in. Would you let a bunch of strangers into your house, not knowing if one of them is planning to kill you? I doubt it. This is common sense, something that is in short supply in the EU as of late.



What he is saying is that if a person's beliefs include the desire for genocide of Jews, the notion that women and children are theirs to do with as they choose, and the design to destroy western civilization while replacing it with their own, they are more than welcome in his brave new world.

If they speak out too vociferously against these things, they aren't.


----------



## JakeStarkey

*Only you say that silly nonsense*.  "So, we should just let everyone in no matter if we can vet them properly or not. Great formula for total destruction of the country. You must really hate it here."

*Only you say that silly nonsense*. I am so sick and tired of liberals and progressives saying that we cannot protect ourselves. If we cannot protect ourselves then maybe we should just erase all borders and have a new one world government. Oh, wait, that is what you want, no borders, no individuality. That is what this is really all about. NO INDIVIDUALITY. If we where all just the same we would be so much better off. Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, Nazis, Communists, Facists, great bunch of folks there.

*I agree, the left should make its case*. Why won't the American left just be honest? If you really think your ideas are better, then just come out and say what they are, and stop trying to make everyone who disagrees with you out to be villans? What makes your ideas so great? Why will they work now?

*What you said was, "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you."  I would believe that you were referring to Muslims. * False equivalent fallacy? NEVER SAID THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE VIOLENT. All I said was there is a group of people who are bent on descruction of our way of life. I didn't say who they were, I didn't say where they are. I said THAT they are. If you insist on putting words in my mouth, then just shut the go somewhere else to do it. I, for one, will no longer tolerate it. If you cannot make your arguement without such tactics then your arguement is not valid. 

*Prove that we can't.   *What do you propose we do? And don't just spew some crap about how we can vet them already. The Syrian government can't even vet the Syrians. How the hell do you think we can?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> 
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that?
> 
> We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".
> 
> No matter how horrible the crimes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot just go around "defending" your position with attempted slander. Doesn't hold up. If you have a REAL arguement, state it. Otherwise, please keep your slanderous comments on YOUR side of the pond.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slander ?
Click to expand...

I think OS means "libel."  If he does, he is still wrong.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> 
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that?
> 
> We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".
> 
> No matter how horrible the crimes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot just go around "defending" your position with attempted slander. Doesn't hold up. If you have a REAL arguement, state it. Otherwise, please keep your slanderous comments on YOUR side of the pond.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slander ?
Click to expand...

 Yes slander: "Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US." Your words. Slander.


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> 
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that?
> 
> We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".
> 
> 
> No matter how horrible the crimes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.
Click to expand...



You did not address my point, that recent events have shown that Political Correctness have made Brits are afraid to report wronging by Muslims for fear of being called racist.

And that if they do report such wrong doing, the police might very well refuse to act.

Thus, you can't know that your neighbors have done "nothing wrong".

How exactly did the Rape Rings make money?


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. "So, we should just let everyone in no matter if we can vet them properly or not. Great formula for total destruction of the country. You must really hate it here."
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. I am so sick and tired of liberals and progressives saying that we cannot protect ourselves. If we cannot protect ourselves then maybe we should just erase all borders and have a new one world government. Oh, wait, that is what you want, no borders, no individuality. That is what this is really all about. NO INDIVIDUALITY. If we where all just the same we would be so much better off. Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, Nazis, Communists, Facists, great bunch of folks there.


 What are you getting at?


JakeStarkey said:


> *What you said was, "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you." I would believe that you were referring to Muslims. * False equivalent fallacy? NEVER SAID THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE VIOLENT. All I said was there is a group of people who are bent on descruction of our way of life. I didn't say who they were, I didn't say where they are. I said THAT they are. If you insist on putting words in my mouth, then just shut the go somewhere else to do it. I, for one, will no longer tolerate it. If you cannot make your arguement without such tactics then your arguement is not valid.


So, you make an assumption and just go with it. Typical.


JakeStarkey said:


> *Prove that we can't. *What do you propose we do? And don't just spew some crap about how we can vet them already. The Syrian government can't even vet the Syrians. How the hell do you think we can?


Unprovable. Maybe someone should prove that they CAN. Maybe you should prove that you are not a racist, sexist, or homophobe. Same thing. A negative is unprovable, only a positive can be proven correct or incorrect. Ask any scientist. You cannot prove something does not exist, you can prove that something does exist.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that?
> 
> We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".
> 
> No matter how horrible the crimes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot just go around "defending" your position with attempted slander. Doesn't hold up. If you have a REAL arguement, state it. Otherwise, please keep your slanderous comments on YOUR side of the pond.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slander ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think OS means "libel."  If he does, he is still wrong.
Click to expand...

 According to _legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com_
*slander*. n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.
According to _dictionary.law.com_
*libel*. 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
So, I stand corrected. It was not slander, it was Libel. Point still stands.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that?
> 
> We have seen that Brits are afraid to report wrong doing done by Muslims for fear of being branded "racist".
> 
> No matter how horrible the crimes.
> 
> 
> 
> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot just go around "defending" your position with attempted slander. Doesn't hold up. If you have a REAL arguement, state it. Otherwise, please keep your slanderous comments on YOUR side of the pond.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slander ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think OS means "libel."  If he does, he is still wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to _legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com_
> *slander*. n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.
> According to _dictionary.law.com_
> *libel*. 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
> So, I stand corrected. It was not slander, it was Libel. Point still stands.
Click to expand...

Lol ! Still cant see why you are threatening me with this. What have I said ?


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Tommy Tainant said:


> Lol ! Still cant see why you are threatening me with this. What have I said ?




838 times and counting, you have said nothing at all.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> You cannot just go around "defending" your position with attempted slander. Doesn't hold up. If you have a REAL arguement, state it. Otherwise, please keep your slanderous comments on YOUR side of the pond.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slander ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think OS means "libel."  If he does, he is still wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to _legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com_
> *slander*. n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.
> According to _dictionary.law.com_
> *libel*. 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
> So, I stand corrected. It was not slander, it was Libel. Point still stands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lol ! Still cant see why you are threatening me with this. What have I said ?
Click to expand...

 Not a threat, a fact.
"Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US." I really do get tired of reminding people of what they have said. Sad really.


----------



## JakeStarkey

oldsoul said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. "So, we should just let everyone in no matter if we can vet them properly or not. Great formula for total destruction of the country. You must really hate it here."
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. I am so sick and tired of liberals and progressives saying that we cannot protect ourselves. If we cannot protect ourselves then maybe we should just erase all borders and have a new one world government. Oh, wait, that is what you want, no borders, no individuality. That is what this is really all about. NO INDIVIDUALITY. If we where all just the same we would be so much better off. Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, Nazis, Communists, Facists, great bunch of folks there.
> 
> 
> 
> What are you getting at?
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What you said was, "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you." I would believe that you were referring to Muslims. * False equivalent fallacy? NEVER SAID THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE VIOLENT. All I said was there is a group of people who are bent on descruction of our way of life. I didn't say who they were, I didn't say where they are. I said THAT they are. If you insist on putting words in my mouth, then just shut the go somewhere else to do it. I, for one, will no longer tolerate it. If you cannot make your arguement without such tactics then your arguement is not valid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, you make an assumption and just go with it. Typical.
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Prove that we can't. *What do you propose we do? And don't just spew some crap about how we can vet them already. The Syrian government can't even vet the Syrians. How the hell do you think we can?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unprovable. Maybe someone should prove that they CAN. Maybe you should prove that you are not a racist, sexist, or homophobe. Same thing. A negative is unprovable, only a positive can be proven correct or incorrect. Ask any scientist. You cannot prove something does not exist, you can prove that something does exist.
Click to expand...

You are whining because I slapped down your assumptions about me?  You need to apply the standards to yourself.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. "So, we should just let everyone in no matter if we can vet them properly or not. Great formula for total destruction of the country. You must really hate it here."
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. I am so sick and tired of liberals and progressives saying that we cannot protect ourselves. If we cannot protect ourselves then maybe we should just erase all borders and have a new one world government. Oh, wait, that is what you want, no borders, no individuality. That is what this is really all about. NO INDIVIDUALITY. If we where all just the same we would be so much better off. Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, Nazis, Communists, Facists, great bunch of folks there.
> 
> 
> 
> What are you getting at?
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What you said was, "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you." I would believe that you were referring to Muslims. * False equivalent fallacy? NEVER SAID THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE VIOLENT. All I said was there is a group of people who are bent on descruction of our way of life. I didn't say who they were, I didn't say where they are. I said THAT they are. If you insist on putting words in my mouth, then just shut the go somewhere else to do it. I, for one, will no longer tolerate it. If you cannot make your arguement without such tactics then your arguement is not valid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, you make an assumption and just go with it. Typical.
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Prove that we can't. *What do you propose we do? And don't just spew some crap about how we can vet them already. The Syrian government can't even vet the Syrians. How the hell do you think we can?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unprovable. Maybe someone should prove that they CAN. Maybe you should prove that you are not a racist, sexist, or homophobe. Same thing. A negative is unprovable, only a positive can be proven correct or incorrect. Ask any scientist. You cannot prove something does not exist, you can prove that something does exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are whining because I slapped down your assumptions about me?  You need to apply the standards to yourself.
Click to expand...

 Point taken. Now could you address the rest of the post? Or is it just too much trouble? (a question, not assumption)


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> You cannot just go around "defending" your position with attempted slander. Doesn't hold up. If you have a REAL arguement, state it. Otherwise, please keep your slanderous comments on YOUR side of the pond.
> 
> 
> 
> Slander ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think OS means "libel."  If he does, he is still wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to _legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com_
> *slander*. n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.
> According to _dictionary.law.com_
> *libel*. 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
> So, I stand corrected. It was not slander, it was Libel. Point still stands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lol ! Still cant see why you are threatening me with this. What have I said ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not a threat, a fact.
> "Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US." I really do get tired of reminding people of what they have said. Sad really.
Click to expand...

So where is the libel ?


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Slander ?
> 
> 
> 
> I think OS means "libel."  If he does, he is still wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to _legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com_
> *slander*. n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.
> According to _dictionary.law.com_
> *libel*. 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
> So, I stand corrected. It was not slander, it was Libel. Point still stands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lol ! Still cant see why you are threatening me with this. What have I said ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not a threat, a fact.
> "Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US." I really do get tired of reminding people of what they have said. Sad really.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So where is the libel ?
Click to expand...

Are you really that dense? Do you lack reading comprehesion skills?
How is saying that it is obvious that one is not presumed innocent until proven guilty in These United States, *not* libel?
I know, as well as you, that that statement is untrue and likely designed to attack and ridicule the reputation of These United States.


----------



## JakeStarkey

oldsoul said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. "So, we should just let everyone in no matter if we can vet them properly or not. Great formula for total destruction of the country. You must really hate it here."
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. I am so sick and tired of liberals and progressives saying that we cannot protect ourselves. If we cannot protect ourselves then maybe we should just erase all borders and have a new one world government. Oh, wait, that is what you want, no borders, no individuality. That is what this is really all about. NO INDIVIDUALITY. If we where all just the same we would be so much better off. Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, Nazis, Communists, Facists, great bunch of folks there.
> 
> 
> 
> What are you getting at?
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What you said was, "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you." I would believe that you were referring to Muslims. * False equivalent fallacy? NEVER SAID THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE VIOLENT. All I said was there is a group of people who are bent on descruction of our way of life. I didn't say who they were, I didn't say where they are. I said THAT they are. If you insist on putting words in my mouth, then just shut the go somewhere else to do it. I, for one, will no longer tolerate it. If you cannot make your arguement without such tactics then your arguement is not valid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, you make an assumption and just go with it. Typical.
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Prove that we can't. *What do you propose we do? And don't just spew some crap about how we can vet them already. The Syrian government can't even vet the Syrians. How the hell do you think we can?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unprovable. Maybe someone should prove that they CAN. Maybe you should prove that you are not a racist, sexist, or homophobe. Same thing. A negative is unprovable, only a positive can be proven correct or incorrect. Ask any scientist. You cannot prove something does not exist, you can prove that something does exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are whining because I slapped down your assumptions about me?  You need to apply the standards to yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point taken. Now could you address the rest of the post? Or is it just too much trouble? (a question, not assumption)
Click to expand...

They have been answered to my satisfaction.  And, yes, of course something that is not there can be proved.  Determine if "Is John at the corner?" with cctv.  If the cctv shows John did not exist at the corner during the time frame, he was not there.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think OS means "libel."  If he does, he is still wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> According to _legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com_
> *slander*. n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.
> According to _dictionary.law.com_
> *libel*. 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
> So, I stand corrected. It was not slander, it was Libel. Point still stands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lol ! Still cant see why you are threatening me with this. What have I said ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not a threat, a fact.
> "Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US." I really do get tired of reminding people of what they have said. Sad really.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So where is the libel ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you really that dense? Do you lack reading comprehesion skills?
> How is saying that it is obvious that one is not presumed innocent until proven guilty in These United States, *not* libel?
> I know, as well as you, that that statement is untrue and likely designed to attack and ridicule the reputation of These United States.
Click to expand...

Classic. You are off your head matey.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to _legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com_
> *slander*. n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.
> According to _dictionary.law.com_
> *libel*. 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
> So, I stand corrected. It was not slander, it was Libel. Point still stands.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol ! Still cant see why you are threatening me with this. What have I said ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not a threat, a fact.
> "Well believe it or not people are innocent until proven guilty in the UK. Obviously that is not the case in the US." I really do get tired of reminding people of what they have said. Sad really.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So where is the libel ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you really that dense? Do you lack reading comprehesion skills?
> How is saying that it is obvious that one is not presumed innocent until proven guilty in These United States, *not* libel?
> I know, as well as you, that that statement is untrue and likely designed to attack and ridicule the reputation of These United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Classic. You are off your head matey.
Click to expand...

 Laugh all you want, you know the truth. You just can't face it.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. "So, we should just let everyone in no matter if we can vet them properly or not. Great formula for total destruction of the country. You must really hate it here."
> 
> *Only you say that silly nonsense*. I am so sick and tired of liberals and progressives saying that we cannot protect ourselves. If we cannot protect ourselves then maybe we should just erase all borders and have a new one world government. Oh, wait, that is what you want, no borders, no individuality. That is what this is really all about. NO INDIVIDUALITY. If we where all just the same we would be so much better off. Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, Nazis, Communists, Facists, great bunch of folks there.
> 
> 
> 
> What are you getting at?
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What you said was, "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you." I would believe that you were referring to Muslims. * False equivalent fallacy? NEVER SAID THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE VIOLENT. All I said was there is a group of people who are bent on descruction of our way of life. I didn't say who they were, I didn't say where they are. I said THAT they are. If you insist on putting words in my mouth, then just shut the go somewhere else to do it. I, for one, will no longer tolerate it. If you cannot make your arguement without such tactics then your arguement is not valid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, you make an assumption and just go with it. Typical.
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Prove that we can't. *What do you propose we do? And don't just spew some crap about how we can vet them already. The Syrian government can't even vet the Syrians. How the hell do you think we can?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unprovable. Maybe someone should prove that they CAN. Maybe you should prove that you are not a racist, sexist, or homophobe. Same thing. A negative is unprovable, only a positive can be proven correct or incorrect. Ask any scientist. You cannot prove something does not exist, you can prove that something does exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are whining because I slapped down your assumptions about me?  You need to apply the standards to yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point taken. Now could you address the rest of the post? Or is it just too much trouble? (a question, not assumption)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have been answered to my satisfaction.  And, yes, of course something that is not there can be proved.  Determine if "Is John at the corner?" with cctv.  If the cctv shows John did not exist at the corner during the time frame, he was not there.[/QUOTE/]
> False comparison fallicy. Se I can do that too. All your "story" proves is that the camera did not capture the image of John at the corner. He may have been out of the veiw of the camera. Now, to be fair, one might assume that John was not at the corner, but you have not proven he was not. I could, potentially, prove he WAS somewhere else, thus demonstrating he was not there. But, there is no other way to prove John was not there.
> See how this works?
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Nope, you got it wrong, but that is your problem not mine.


----------



## pismoe

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
Click to expand...

---------------------------   thanks OldSoul but Tommy would never understand !!


----------



## pismoe

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
Click to expand...

-----------------------------   heck , you Banned Geert Wilder and Micheal Savage to name 2 Tommy !!


----------



## Tommy Tainant

pismoe said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> -----------------------------   heck , you Banned Geert Wilder and Micheal Savage to name 2 Tommy !!
Click to expand...

I wish we had banned that shite Bush as well. That said it was a magical day when they arrested Pinochet in London.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

How were 


oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
> _According to merriam-webster:_
> *Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
> Does that clear things up for you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
Click to expand...

How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> How were
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
> _According to merriam-webster:_
> *Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
> Does that clear things up for you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
Click to expand...



Nope. He doesn't rape your nation's children.

That's the kind of trash you brit lefties want.

ANd GOd Forbid you have a real debate about *WHY* and *HOW* that happened so much for so long, and is certain to happen again, if it is not STILL OCCURRING in rings that were not caught.


----------



## pismoe

as I have said before , there is no Freedom of Speech in England Tom .


----------



## Tommy Tainant

pismoe said:


> as I have said before , there is no Freedom of Speech in England Tom .


There is no freedom of hate speech. And rightly so.It helps keep the fascists in check.


----------



## pismoe

foolishness , who gets to decide what 'hate speech' is Tom ??      The queen or the retired tony blier blair !!


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> as I have said before , there is no Freedom of Speech in England Tom .
> 
> 
> 
> There is no freedom of hate speech. And rightly so.It helps keep the fascists in check.
Click to expand...


Tell it to the children in Rotherham.


----------



## pismoe

children of 'rotherham' ---   http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/w...nd-were-sexually-abused-report-says.html?_r=0  ---   yep , those muslims ae working out pretty good ehh Tommy !!


----------



## Correll

pismoe said:


> children of 'rotherham' ---   http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/w...nd-were-sexually-abused-report-says.html?_r=0  ---   yep , those muslims ae working out pretty good ehh Tommy !!



I wonder, would it be considered hate speech to point out that those rings were enabled by Political Correctness?


----------



## DarkFury

JakeStarkey said:


> This is a false OP, so noted and reported.  The OP correctly should be, "
> *Pegida Laments, "Trump is Right"*


*You care to point out what you are calling a "reported" feature in this OP?*


----------



## Valerie

A British soldier who had his leg blown off by a bomb while serving in Iraq has taken the internet by storm after his Facebook post attacking Islamophobia went viral.

Herbert, who was 19 when he suffered the life-changing injury, took to Facebook after complaining that he was "getting frustrated" with people expecting him to be racist after losing his leg.

"Yes. A Muslim man blew me up, and I lost my leg," he wrote. "A Muslim man also lost his arm that day wearing a British Uniform.

"A Muslim medic was in the helicopter that took me from the field. A Muslim surgeon performed the surgery that saved my life.

"A Muslim Nurse was part of the team that helped me when I returned to the UK. 

"A Muslim Healthcare Assistant was part of the team that sorted out my day to day needs in rehabilitation when I was learning to walk.

"A Muslim taxi driver gave me a free ride the first time I went for a beer with my Dad after I came home.

"A Muslim doctor offered my Dad comfort and advice in a pub, when he didn't know how to deal with my medicines and side effects."


*"Blaming all Muslims for the actions of groups like Daeshe and the Taliban, is like blaming all Christians for the actions of the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church," he added.

"Get a grip of your lives, hug your family and get back to work."*

Amputee soldier's Muslim Facebook post goes viral - CNN.com

Imagine ban on Muslims: How different would America be? - CNN.com


----------



## Correll

Valerie said:


> A British soldier who had his leg blown off by a bomb while serving in Iraq has taken the internet by storm after his Facebook post attacking Islamophobia went viral.
> 
> Herbert, who was 19 when he suffered the life-changing injury, took to Facebook after complaining that he was "getting frustrated" with people expecting him to be racist after losing his leg.
> 
> "Yes. A Muslim man blew me up, and I lost my leg," he wrote. "A Muslim man also lost his arm that day wearing a British Uniform.
> 
> "A Muslim medic was in the helicopter that took me from the field. A Muslim surgeon performed the surgery that saved my life.
> 
> "A Muslim Nurse was part of the team that helped me when I returned to the UK.
> 
> "A Muslim Healthcare Assistant was part of the team that sorted out my day to day needs in rehabilitation when I was learning to walk.
> 
> "A Muslim taxi driver gave me a free ride the first time I went for a beer with my Dad after I came home.
> 
> "A Muslim doctor offered my Dad comfort and advice in a pub, when he didn't know how to deal with my medicines and side effects."
> 
> 
> *"Blaming all Muslims for the actions of groups like Daeshe and the Taliban, is like blaming all Christians for the actions of the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church," he added.
> 
> "Get a grip of your lives, hug your family and get back to work."*
> 
> Amputee soldier's Muslim Facebook post goes viral - CNN.com
> 
> Imagine ban on Muslims: How different would America be? - CNN.com




That's wonderful and touching.

I wonder how he feels about the way that the police refused to investigate the Muslim Rape Rings in the UK that raped and tortured thousands of white children.


----------



## Valerie

since he's a soldier determined to fight and protect innocents from terrorism, one can assume rape rings and torture would be detestable to him... weird that you'd ask that. and by weird i mean pathetic.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Valerie said:


> A British soldier who had his leg blown off by a bomb while serving in Iraq has taken the internet by storm after his Facebook post attacking Islamophobia went viral.
> 
> Herbert, who was 19 when he suffered the life-changing injury, took to Facebook after complaining that he was "getting frustrated" with people expecting him to be racist after losing his leg.




What race is Islam, again?

I keep forgetting.


 If "Islamophobia" is a word attributed to the rejection of Islam, though, wouldn't that make you a "conservaphobic", or a "Libertarianiphobic" or a "Rightwingaphobic" or phobic of any other ideology you rejected?


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Valerie said:


> since he's a soldier determined to fight and protect innocents from terrorism, one can assume rape rings and torture would be detestable to him... weird that you'd ask that. and by weird i mean pathetic.




 Since the authorities in question were seeking to avoid these scurrilous charges you parrot in terms of "racism" and "Islamophobia" lest they do anything about the situation, his is a very valid point.

  This constant cacophony arising from dogmatic leftists calling people names acts as the sort of background noise that intimidates others into silence on the matter.  In your parroting of these themes, you are part of the problem rather than part of the solution.


----------



## Valerie

Dogmaphobe said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> 
> A British soldier who had his leg blown off by a bomb while serving in Iraq has taken the internet by storm after his Facebook post attacking Islamophobia went viral.
> 
> Herbert, who was 19 when he suffered the life-changing injury, took to Facebook after complaining that he was "getting frustrated" with people expecting him to be racist after losing his leg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What race is Islam, again?
> 
> I keep forgetting.
> 
> *
> If* "Islamophobia" is a word attributed to the rejection of Islam, though, wouldn't that make you a "conservaphobic", or a "Libertarianiphobic" or a "Rightwingaphobic" or phobic of any other ideology you rejected?
Click to expand...



the soldier or the writer of the cnn article misused the term racist instead of bigot.

as to the rest of your yammering attempting to equivocate my supposed phobes..pfft bad logic

the op is claiming that trump is right.. it's on the offense. as if trump is right about banning all muslims


----------



## Valerie

Dogmaphobe said:


> This constant cacophony arising from dogmatic leftists calling people names acts as the sort of *background noise that intimidates others into silence on the matter. * In your parroting of these themes, you are part of the problem rather than part of the solution.




people aren't arguing against banning all muslims just to make you feel bad.  rational people agree it's not the right approach to solving these types of problems... it's understandably emotional, but we have to rise above the fear and be humane.  it is unbecoming of a presidential candidate to actually encourage and perpetuate this type of ignorant rhetoric speaking of "intimidating cacophony" and trump is wrong to try to lead us down this misguided path... no matter how many loudly agree with him, he is wrong.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Valerie said:


> the soldier or the writer of the cnn article misused the term racist instead of bigot.
> 
> as to the rest of your yammering attempting to equivocate my supposed phobes..pfft bad logic
> 
> the op is claiming that trump is right.. it's on the offense. as if trump is right about banning all muslims




 You chose to print the soldiers words thus promoting the point of view, did you not?  

 In using the word "bigot" to describe those who reject the political/religious ideology called Islam, it is ENTIRELY logical to apply the term to describe the rejection of any other.  

 You obviously would not recognize logic if it were a two by four smacking you along side the head.


----------



## Valerie

the point of view and it's message are unchanged by the misuse of the word racist vs bigot


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Valerie said:


> the point of view and it's message are unchanged by the misuse of the word racist vs bigot




I realize you lack the ability to understand concepts since you live in your little fantasy world of political correctness, but you could always try addressing your profound ignorance on the subject and try learning what Islam actually IS. It is  a supremacist ideology that is part religion and part political, and it divides the world into Dar al Harb (house of war, or any place not governed by Islam) and Dar al Islam (house of Islam).  It is a Muslim's duty to turn the former into the latter.

The majority of Muslims believe in killing apostates. Virulent hatred of homosexuals is almost 100%. Half or more than half of all Muslims in many countries are the product of arranged marriages between close family members. Women are second-class citizens by very design of sharia law.

If rejecting all this makes one a "bigot", then instead of being a weasel who points fingers only at others, you should have a little bit of class by accepting it for yourself for your own rejection of anything that does not march in lockstep with this vapid political correctness of yours.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Dogmaphobe said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> 
> the point of view and it's message are unchanged by the misuse of the word racist vs bigot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I realize you lack the ability to understand concepts since you live in your little fantasy world of political correctness, but you could always try addressing your profound ignorance on the subject and try learning what Islam actually IS. It is  a supremacist ideology that is part religion and part political, and it divides the world into Dar al Harb (house of war, or any place not governed by Islam) and Dar al Islam (house of Islam).  It is a Muslim's duty to turn the former into the latter.
> 
> The majority of Muslims believe in killing apostates. Virulent hatred of homosexuals is almost 100%. Half or more than half of all Muslims in many countries are the product of arranged marriages between close family members. Women are second-class citizens by very design of sharia law.
> 
> If rejecting all this makes one a "bigot", then instead of being a weasel who points fingers only at others, you should have a little bit of class by accepting it for yourself for your own rejection of anything that does not march in lockstep with this vapid political correctness of yours.
Click to expand...

Here we go, took a while to get there.


----------



## wrathbone

oldsoul said:


> Is anyone accually going to state that Europe is NOT being destablized? That IS what is happening, anyone who thinks this will not happen here is delusional. It can and it will, unless we do something to stop it...


AGREED! Big league effin' problems in England and the rest of Europe and it will happen here as well. The more refugees and aliens we take the higher risk we become through sheer stats...


----------



## wrathbone

Dogmaphobe said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> 
> the point of view and it's message are unchanged by the misuse of the word racist vs bigot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I realize you lack the ability to understand concepts since you live in your little fantasy world of political correctness, but you could always try addressing your profound ignorance on the subject and try learning what Islam actually IS. It is  a supremacist ideology that is part religion and part political, and it divides the world into Dar al Harb (house of war, or any place not governed by Islam) and Dar al Islam (house of Islam).  It is a Muslim's duty to turn the former into the latter.
> 
> The majority of Muslims believe in killing apostates. Virulent hatred of homosexuals is almost 100%. Half or more than half of all Muslims in many countries are the product of arranged marriages between close family members. Women are second-class citizens by very design of sharia law.
> 
> If rejecting all this makes one a "bigot", then instead of being a weasel who points fingers only at others, you should have a little bit of class by accepting it for yourself for your own rejection of anything that does not march in lockstep with this vapid political correctness of yours.
Click to expand...

Don't want to learn what Islam is.   Religion is a tool for evil and Islam happens to be creating a lot of  fuckin' global problems.   I'm quite educated and know better than to put faith into any religion as a sort of redemption or fear.  To not recognize the "Muslim Condition" would be pure ignorance my man/child bitch-boy....HA!


----------



## Valerie

*The truth about Muslims in America*
The truth about Muslims in America - CNN.com


----------



## wrathbone

Dogmaphobe said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Islam is a totalitarian political ideology  viciously opposed to the notion of free speech,  demands absolute conformity, micromanages people's lives down to the iota and seeks to destroy all other ways of life. In that, it shares much in common with fascism.   Tommy Taint's role here is to defend this totalitarian ideology and share it's hatred of any criticism of Islam.  In that, he shares qualities with fascism.
> 
> True fascism is a far right ideology, of course, and Tommy Taint is a far leftist, but the net result is a boot stamping upon a human face forever in either case.
Click to expand...

Both idealogues are our natural enemy based upon the behavior of thousands of Muslims murdering each other bent on vindiction.  Screws up the natural rhythms of Capitalism and modern day warfare is only profitable to a conglomerate now.


----------



## wrathbone

wrathbone said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Islam is a totalitarian political ideology  viciously opposed to the notion of free speech,  demands absolute conformity, micromanages people's lives down to the iota and seeks to destroy all other ways of life. In that, it shares much in common with fascism.   Tommy Taint's role here is to defend this totalitarian ideology and share it's hatred of any criticism of Islam.  In that, he shares qualities with fascism.
> 
> True fascism is a far right ideology, of course, and Tommy Taint is a far leftist, but the net result is a boot stamping upon a human face forever in either case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Both idealogues are our natural enemy based upon the behavior of thousands of Muslims murdering each other bent on vindiction.  Screws up the natural rhythms of Capitalism and modern day warfare is only profitable to a conglomerate now.
Click to expand...

And why is it so popular to even suggest a ban on speech, Internet posts based upon not liking a particular stubborn truth or fact or opinion?


----------



## wrathbone

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

Great!  Now tell your Muslim friends to straighten out their "problem" within their religion.  Might want to also mention to ease up on their women, too...  Islam has issues with women's rights if 'ya didn't notice, damned muslim sympathizer


----------



## pismoe

Valerie said:


> *The truth about Muslims in America*
> The truth about Muslims in America - CNN.com


---------------------------------   truth about 'muslims' , check out their history of mayhem , murder , aggression since the invention of  islam in about 700 AD !!     The history of islam is all people need to know Valerie.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Valerie said:


> *The truth about Muslims in America*
> The truth about Muslims in America - CNN.com


Why bother with facts when dumbos just want to air their prejudices ?


----------



## Valerie

that's for anyone else in the universe who may stumble upon this thread..


----------



## Tommy Tainant

wrathbone said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I signed the petition to ban Trump and it wasnt just a Muslim thing.
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well firstly nobody thought that a ban would come out of this process. Secondly, there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether or not you thought the petition would be successfull is irrelevent. Support of an idea is support of an idea. If I where to publicly support everyone having the same standard of living, regardless of their contribution (or lack there of), it would be fair to say that I am a Communist. If you support a Facist petition, one could surmise that you are a Facist. I, however, give you the benifit of the doubt, and merely attack your action, not make a blanket statement about your political leanings.
> 
> You said, "...there are some people whose behaviour falls well short of acceptable and any community should have the right to exclude them." And yet you have a problem with Trump suggesting just that. Typical leftwing double standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The difference being that trump has already behaved badly, my Muslim friends and neighbours have done nothing wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Great!  Now tell your Muslim friends to straighten out their "problem" within their religion.  Might want to also mention to ease up on their women, too...  Islam has issues with women's rights if 'ya didn't notice, damned muslim sympathizer
Click to expand...

I cant engage with you. It demeans me.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Valerie said:


> that's for anyone else in the universe who may stumble upon this thread..


Deserves its own thread.


----------



## Damaged Eagle

JakeStarkey said:


> "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you."
> 
> Fallacy of false equivalency is well represented above.
> 
> The great majority of Muslims don't do violence.



Has Trump done violence?



JakeStarkey said:


> Religion cannot be a basis in America for banning people.  If it were, we would have gotten rid of the Presbyterians long time ago.



It seems our government officials, with the backing of the justice system, can justify just about anything when it comes to banning. They can ban books, music, pictures, statues, certain words, and even languages, etc... when they find it fits their political agenda. I'm sure with enough motivation and political hoop-jumping that our government officials can find a reason to ban a religion from being practiced in the United States.






*****CHUCKLE*****


----------



## wrathbone

Why has religion become so important?   If Christians were running amok on the same scale as muslims within Europe, the powers that be would crucify these fanatics.....rightfully, so.


----------



## wrathbone

Honestly, Tommy......I really sympathize for England, France and the rest of Europe.  You have all become available targets for terrorism and a twisted version of Islam - Mohammedism.  I feel the supposed power structure within Islam has not done enough to curb this twisted idealogue, and their inability to send a clear global message defining Islam.    I always hear, "One has to learn about Islam",....now I have to educate myself according to the needs of muslims?    I have more productive goals to achieve rather than spend my time analyzing a particular religion that abuses women.


----------



## wrathbone

pismoe said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The truth about Muslims in America*
> The truth about Muslims in America - CNN.com
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------   truth about 'muslims' , check out their history of mayhem , murder , aggression since the invention of  islam in about 700 AD !!     The history of islam is all people need to know Valerie.
Click to expand...

AGREED!


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Tommy Tainant said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> 
> that's for anyone else in the universe who may stumble upon this thread..
> 
> 
> 
> Deserves its own thread.
Click to expand...



and you deserve a nice, comphy  little room of your own with soft padding on the walls to keep you safe from injury and an attendant to bring you the sorts of things that help you cope.


----------



## wrathbone

Okay, DOG...   Any other pearls of wisdom?


----------



## pismoe

I bring up my CONSPIRACY which is that 'islam' is better than any other religion for any government to have in place .  islam is submission and in a government like iran the submission is to the state of iran and the will of 'allah' which is whatever iran says that it is .   Crazy conspiracy , maybe but look how Western governments seems to be pushing islam on the people of Europe .   And the people of Europe seem to be throwing away the old time morality and religion of Christianity so this is Western governments chance to adopt 'islam'  IMO .  -------------------------------------------------------------------    also , I read somewhere that Christianity was adopted in Russia many hundreds of years ago because the Czar or king at the time didn't think that he could successfully stop the drinking of alcohol amongst the Russian people .  -----------   just my Conspiracy and just a comment .


----------



## wrathbone

...maybe


----------



## pismoe

yep , maybe , makes me glad that I am older .   I'd hate to be a pacifist euro kid going to school with the aggressive hordes that are being unleashed on the euros .    Same goes for the USA to some extent especially with public schools , mothers , wussy fathers , experts pushing nonviolence and no fighting or seld defense at any cost .


----------



## Dogmaphobe

wrathbone said:


> Okay, DOG...   Any other pearls of wisdom?



Not for you, son.

You seem incapable of understanding much.


----------



## wrathbone

Dogmaphobe said:


> wrathbone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, DOG...   Any other pearls of wisdom?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not for you, son.
> 
> You seem incapable of understanding much.
Click to expand...

How would you ascertain my understanding of anything based upon the very little communication I've experienced here?  Are you being projective and corrective?


----------



## wrathbone

wrathbone said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wrathbone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, DOG...   Any other pearls of wisdom?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not for you, son.
> 
> You seem incapable of understanding much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How would you ascertain my understanding of anything based upon the very little communication I've experienced here?  Are you being projective and corrective?
Click to expand...

What is it specifically that I don't understand much of?   I'm now your son?    You're weird and a pseudo-superior my doggie...


----------



## wrathbone

So,.....doggie, share with me your much needed enlightenment and rare intellect.   I'm in great need of understanding 'ya judgmental basatge!


----------



## Dogmaphobe

wrathbone said:


> So,.....doggie, share with me your much needed enlightenment and rare intellect.   I'm in great need of understanding 'ya judgmental basatge!



You certainly do keep sniffing at my heels for somebody who is supposed to be new here. 

 I do appreciate your little fanboi act, but perhaps you can branch out a bit instead of just following one person around, k?


----------



## wrathbone

Dogmaphobe said:


> wrathbone said:
> 
> 
> 
> So,.....doggie, share with me your much needed enlightenment and rare intellect.   I'm in great need of understanding 'ya judgmental basatge!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You certainly do keep sniffing at my heels for somebody who is supposed to be new here.
> 
> I do appreciate your little fanboi act, but perhaps you can branch out a bit instead of just following one person around, k?
Click to expand...


  "Here" is where?   Do you own this domain?  Definitely not sniffing you about, my dearie...Just responding to your projective and disparaging judgement.   You're immediately getting personal.  Do you have an insecurity complex?  Are you offended?  People seem to want to be negative and assume....You don't have to like a particular opinion, but that opinion doesn't define a persons entire persona,


----------



## wrathbone

wrathbone said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wrathbone said:
> 
> 
> 
> So,.....doggie, share with me your much needed enlightenment and rare intellect.   I'm in great need of understanding 'ya judgmental basatge!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You certainly do keep sniffing at my heels for somebody who is supposed to be new here.
> 
> I do appreciate your little fanboi act, but perhaps you can branch out a bit instead of just following one person around, k?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Here" is where?   Do you own this domain?  Definitely not sniffing you about, my dearie...Just responding to your projective and disparaging judgement.   You're immediately getting personal.  Do you have an insecurity complex?  Are you offended?  People seem to want to be negative and assume....You don't have to like a particular opinion, but that opinion doesn't define a persons entire persona,
Click to expand...


So now your so important i'm following you around?  Get over yourself......it's called a response to your petulant gibberish...


----------



## Dogmaphobe

wrathbone said:


> So now your so important i'm following you around?  Get over yourself......it's called a response to your petulant gibberish...




Thanks, fanboi.

I do appreciate the time you spent attempting to write. .


----------



## wrathbone

So now I cannot write?    You're funny....Ha!    You're a very critical and over-corrective nobody.   Grow up and spare me the "smartest person in the room" routine because you feel some seniority or have nothing of substance to share beyond personal assumptions and broad-stroke speculation.  How old are you platinum,... member?


----------



## wrathbone

wrathbone said:


> So now I cannot write?    You're funny....Ha!    You're a very critical and over-corrective nobody.   Grow up and spare me the "smartest person in the room" routine because you feel some seniority or have nothing of substance to share beyond personal assumptions and broad-stroke speculation.  How old are you platinum,... member?




Anyhow, getting back to Trump, and his proposals for combating global Islamic extremism - we need to form a global terrorism intelligence task force. Presently, it's individual intelligence agency's that collect data and follow a direction.  Somewhat like infiltrating organized crime or drug cartels, intelligence is only as good as the provider.  It may take some time to infiltrate these organizations, but timing is everything.  If we don't have necessary plans to respond, we'll always be one step behind.   A global task force is necessary according to the global threat.  We are at critical mass.


----------



## Correll

Valerie said:


> since he's a soldier determined to fight and protect innocents from terrorism, one can assume rape rings and torture would be detestable to him... weird that you'd ask that. and by weird i mean pathetic.




And yet the policies and the culture that did that is unchecked and unchallenged, while he is busy speaking out against islamaphobia.

Odd that. 

YOu would think the protection of British CHildren would be a higher priority...


Indeed, it's odd you are so angry with me for asking about it.

Are you just as angry about the people that allowed it to happen and are defending the policies and culture that led to it in the first place?


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> How were
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> To ban a person for having and stating an opinion is a GREAT example of why the colonies kicked the crap out of your forefathers. That is a Facist move, and you should be ashamed, though I am sure you are not.
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
> _According to merriam-webster:_
> *Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
> Does that clear things up for you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
Click to expand...

 And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> How were
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it fascist?  If Trump can propose a ban, then also a community has the right to petition, which is protected constitutionally.  I would certainly petition a council meeting to keep a proposed FLDS or Kingston housing project out of my town.  Correll wants to keep out Muslims.  Some in Great Britain want to keep out Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
> _According to merriam-webster:_
> *Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
> Does that clear things up for you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
Click to expand...


Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

wrathbone said:


> So now I cannot write?    You're funny....Ha!    You're a very critical and over-corrective nobody.   Grow up and spare me the "smartest person in the room" routine because you feel some seniority or have nothing of substance to share beyond personal assumptions and broad-stroke speculation.  How old are you platinum,... member?




Thanks for the interest in my member, fanboi, but I don't really roll that way. I do appreciate your curiosity, however.

 I think it's pretty obvious to most people that you have some sort of chip on your shoulder and so have singled me out due to your insecurity, but do feel free to fuck off in the future, now, k?


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> How were
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> Huge difference. Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you.
> _According to merriam-webster:_
> *Definition* of *fascism*. : a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and *opposition is not permitted*.
> Does that clear things up for you?
> 
> 
> 
> I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
Click to expand...

 Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> How were
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the issue is that his nonsense was offensive to a large portion of British people and his presence could have caused trouble.The same principle was used to ban David Duke. Britain does not owe Trump anything.
> 
> 
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
Click to expand...

Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> How were
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
> 
> 
> 
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
Click to expand...

 So, now I'm an "idiot" for disagreeing with you. Typical liberal character assasination tactic when other tactics fail.


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> How were
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
> 
> 
> 
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
Click to expand...


He's not the supporting policies that led and will lead to the mass rape of children. That's would be you.

So, who's the idiot?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> How were
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
> 
> 
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, now I'm an "idiot" for disagreeing with you. Typical liberal character assasination tactic when other tactics fail.
Click to expand...

No, you are an idiot because you are an idiot.Whether it is genetic or through lack of opportunities I do not know and neither do I care if I am honest.

You fail to distinguish between the bad actions of the few and the overwhelmingly good behaviour of the many. Idiot.


----------



## oldsoul

Getting back to the topic at hand, is Trump right? Well sort of. He IS right in asserting that there are Syrians, and indeed muslims that intend to do us harm. He is NOT right in asserting that a religious test is what is warranted, constitutionally speaking. A better approach would be to stop all immigration from ANY country where we cannot, reliably, vet the individuals. This would include: Syria, Jordan, Iran, Lybia, and many others. It could be argued as well that the list should include most of Europe (as I understand those responsible for the mass murders in Paris where, in part, "refugees" from Syria). If the French, widely regarded as having the best intelligence in the world, cannot vet these people properly, we should not allow anyone from France to enter either...

Now, I am NOT advocating a complete ban on anyone coming over from the EU, or France specificly, I am merely putting forth the idea that the arguement could be made.


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, now I'm an "idiot" for disagreeing with you. Typical liberal character assasination tactic when other tactics fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, you are an idiot because you are an idiot.Whether it is genetic or through lack of opportunities I do not know and neither do I care if I am honest.
> 
> You fail to distinguish between the bad actions of the few and the overwhelmingly good behaviour of the many. Idiot.
Click to expand...

 True, I have not had interactions with all Btrits, so it was unfair to put forth the idea that you are all the same. My appologies. As to whether or not I am an idiot, well maybe you should wait to pass judgement until you accually get to know a person. I know that is a difficult concept to understand for some, so I will be patient if you are one of those.


----------



## Correll

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, now I'm an "idiot" for disagreeing with you. Typical liberal character assasination tactic when other tactics fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, you are an idiot because you are an idiot.Whether it is genetic or through lack of opportunities I do not know and neither do I care if I am honest.
> 
> You fail to distinguish between the bad actions of the few and the overwhelmingly good behaviour of the many. Idiot.
Click to expand...



He's not the supporting policies that led and will lead to the mass rape of children. That's would be you.

So, who's the idiot?


----------



## oldsoul

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, now I'm an "idiot" for disagreeing with you. Typical liberal character assasination tactic when other tactics fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, you are an idiot because you are an idiot.Whether it is genetic or through lack of opportunities I do not know and neither do I care if I am honest.
> 
> You fail to distinguish between the bad actions of the few and the overwhelmingly good behaviour of the many. Idiot.
Click to expand...

Idiot as defined by thefreedictionary.com:
"
*1. * A person who is considered foolish or stupid.
*2. * A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive."

So, which definition do you refer to? Are you saying that I am foolish/stupid, or are you suggesting that I have "profound mental retardation"?


----------



## oldsoul

oldsoul said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> 
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, now I'm an "idiot" for disagreeing with you. Typical liberal character assasination tactic when other tactics fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, you are an idiot because you are an idiot.Whether it is genetic or through lack of opportunities I do not know and neither do I care if I am honest.
> 
> You fail to distinguish between the bad actions of the few and the overwhelmingly good behaviour of the many. Idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Idiot as defined by thefreedictionary.com:
> "
> *1. * A person who is considered foolish or stupid.
> *2. * A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive."
> 
> So, which definition do you refer to? Are you saying that I am foolish/stupid, or are you suggesting that I have "profound mental retardation"?
Click to expand...

 So, I guess it would be fair to say that continuing to allow people in to ones contry from an area known to harbour rapists and murderers, without adequate vetting, would be silly/foolish/idiotic.


----------



## Correll

oldsoul said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, now I'm an "idiot" for disagreeing with you. Typical liberal character assasination tactic when other tactics fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, you are an idiot because you are an idiot.Whether it is genetic or through lack of opportunities I do not know and neither do I care if I am honest.
> 
> You fail to distinguish between the bad actions of the few and the overwhelmingly good behaviour of the many. Idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Idiot as defined by thefreedictionary.com:
> "
> *1. * A person who is considered foolish or stupid.
> *2. * A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive."
> 
> So, which definition do you refer to? Are you saying that I am foolish/stupid, or are you suggesting that I have "profound mental retardation"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, I guess it would be fair to say that continuing to allow people in to ones contry from an area known to harbour rapists and murderers, without adequate vetting, would be silly/foolish/idiotic.
Click to expand...




He is more concerned about being fair to each and every INDIVIDUAL Muslim, than he is about protecting the young girls of the UK from mass rape and torture.

MINDS like his suspended a social researcher from stating that the Rape Ring was made up of "Asians" and moved her off the case, and allowed the rape ring to continue for another 11 years.


----------



## wrathbone

More projective insults....Hmmm    I don't loathe the British, so again, your assumptions and presumptions are completely wrong.   So, you hang out on a forum that sponsors US political banter and think you're some sort of expert on US politics and Global affairs?   Again, that would be a pseudo-superior-intellectual hypocrite.  You have already become predictable.....move on!


----------



## wrathbone

Tommy Tainant said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> How were
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> True, you own him nothing. If it's offensive then STOP LISTENING. You do not have the right to silence your opposition. THAT IS WHAT FACISTS DO.
> 
> 
> 
> How do we get to silence him ? He is an american citizen. We are just saying that we dont want that kind of trash in our country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And yet you will let in murderous rapists. I guess that's your problem though. Hope your wife or daughter doesn't get it from them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rape and murder are far more prevalent in the US. Should we ban all Americans from Britain ?
> The sensible answer is no. It would be ridiculous to condemn hundreds of millions of people for the actions of a few.
> I suspect that might be a bit over your head though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ya know, I now truely understand why it is that so many in These United States detest the British. You are so condisending it accually hurts my eyes to read your posts anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your rampant idiocy makes it difficult to remain polite. I am sorry but reasoning with idiots is generally wasted time. I hope this helps you.
Click to expand...

 
Tommy.....HaHAHAHHHHHHAAAAaaaa!  Seems like you have more issues with americans than muslim terrorists....just saying.   You come off rather arrogant and superior.  If everything detests you so much, why are you here on a US message board?   Seems like you've become the bully on the block....eh?


----------



## wrathbone

Dogmaphobe said:


> wrathbone said:
> 
> 
> 
> So now I cannot write?    You're funny....Ha!    You're a very critical and over-corrective nobody.   Grow up and spare me the "smartest person in the room" routine because you feel some seniority or have nothing of substance to share beyond personal assumptions and broad-stroke speculation.  How old are you platinum,... member?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the interest in my member, fanboi, but I don't really roll that way. I do appreciate your curiosity, however.
> 
> I think it's pretty obvious to most people that you have some sort of chip on your shoulder and so have singled me out due to your insecurity, but do feel free to fuck off in the future, now, k?
Click to expand...


@Dogmaphobicanal-retentive
Your lame projective one-liners define your petulant behavior.....and a Big League Fuck you, my dear....


----------



## Dogmaphobe

wrathbone said:


> Fuck you, ..




Even if you attempted such, I doubt if I would feel much.  


wrathbone said:


> More projective insults....Hmmm    I don't loathe the British, so again, your assumptions and presumptions are completely wrong.   So, you hang out on a forum that sponsors US political banter and think you're some sort of expert on US politics and Global affairs?   Again, that would be a pseudo-superior-intellectual hypocrite.  You have already become predictable.....move on!




You should ask one of the big kids to show you how to use the quote feature.


----------



## oldsoul

wrathbone said:


> More projective insults....Hmmm    I don't loathe the British, so again, your assumptions and presumptions are completely wrong.   So, you hang out on a forum that sponsors US political banter and think you're some sort of expert on US politics and Global affairs?   Again, that would be a pseudo-superior-intellectual hypocrite.  You have already become predictable.....move on!


 If you are refering to me, not sure as you fail to establish this but I will assume, No insults, and I was not saying ALL of us loathe the British. Learn some reading comprehension skills.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

oldsoul said:


> Learn some reading comprehension skills.




  He's one of those types who reads a couple of things he doesn't comprehend and so blames the person who wrote it for doing something to him they have not done.  It's the classic case of having that blue-collar type chip on his shoulder and resenting anybody who isn't.  I can just imagine him posing in front of the mirror saying "you lookin at me?  You lookin at ME??!!"

 I don't know about you, but I'm getting to the stage when I bruise easily, and my calves are now covered in bruises due to all the leg humping he's giving me.


----------



## theHawk

JakeStarkey said:


> "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you."
> 
> Fallacy of false equivalency is well represented above.
> 
> The great majority of Muslims don't do violence.
> 
> Religion cannot be a basis in America for banning people.  If it were, we would have gotten rid of the Presbyterians long time ago.



It's not banning them for their religion, it's banning them for their beliefs that are contrary to the principles of freedom.  They are the most intolerant and bigoted people on the planet.  We have every right to exercise whatever immigration policy we want.  There is nothing in the constitution that says we must have open borders to everyone.  
Islam is worse than Nazism, there is no reason we should tolerate either.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

theHawk said:


> Islam is worse than Nazism, there is no reason we should tolerate either.




 The two ideologies have cross bread to a great degree, as well.  Matthias Kuntzel has written extensively about the connections.

 What I find interesting is that when I was a kid there were extremely few people holding Nazi-like beliefs and those who did were marginalized and extremist right wingers. Today, the vast majority are left wingers and it is becoming increasingly main stream.

It is like watching an infection spread. As Islam invades Europe , the useful idiots catch the disease and help pave the way for the conquest.


----------



## JakeStarkey

theHawk said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you."
> 
> Fallacy of false equivalency is well represented above.
> 
> The great majority of Muslims don't do violence.
> 
> Religion cannot be a basis in America for banning people.  If it were, we would have gotten rid of the Presbyterians long time ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not banning them for their religion, it's banning them for their beliefs that are contrary to the principles of freedom.  They are the most intolerant and bigoted people on the planet.  We have every right to exercise whatever immigration policy we want.  There is nothing in the constitution that says we muban travel from Islamic nationsst have open borders to everyone.
> Islam is worse than Nazism, there is no reason we should tolerate either.
Click to expand...

All of that is your opinion.  Your type of langauge would fit right into Islamofascism in spirit.

What we can do is ban people from certain nations until we are satisfied certain individuals are not a threat.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Alt media right lie =+ Today, the vast majority are left wingers and it is becoming increasingly main stream.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you."
> 
> Fallacy of false equivalency is well represented above.
> 
> The great majority of Muslims don't do violence.
> 
> Religion cannot be a basis in America for banning people.  If it were, we would have gotten rid of the Presbyterians long time ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not banning them for their religion, it's banning them for their beliefs that are contrary to the principles of freedom.  They are the most intolerant and bigoted people on the planet.  We have every right to exercise whatever immigration policy we want.  There is nothing in the constitution that says we muban travel from Islamic nationsst have open borders to everyone.
> Islam is worse than Nazism, there is no reason we should tolerate either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All of that is your opinion.  Your type of langauge would fit right into Islamofascism in spirit.
> 
> What we can do is ban people from certain nations until we are satisfied certain individuals are not a threat.
Click to expand...

 And that is exactly what is being proposed here. Ther is a group of people in certain contries that are a threat to us. We have every right, and indeed the obligation, to ban everyone from those countries until we can discern who is a threat and who is not. The fact that they happened to be , primarily, Islamic has no bearing on the matter at all.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

JakeStarkey said:


> All of that is your opinion.  Your type of langauge would fit right into Islamofascism in spirit.
> 
> What we can do is ban people from certain nations until we are satisfied certain individuals are not a threat.




 If this were 1941, and somebody wished to ban National Socialists from entering the country, would you make a similar claim that they were the same as the Nazis in spirit?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Fallacy of false equivalency, dog.  But you would because you wish to ban religion; therefore, you would ban philosophy.

Simply ban people from nations where such people are likely to be.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> Fallacy of false equivalency, dog.  But you would because you wish to ban religion; therefore, you would ban philosophy.
> 
> Simply ban people from nations where such people are likely to be.


 "*False equivalence* is a logical *fallacy* which describes a situation where there is a logical and apparent *equivalence*, but when in fact there is none. This *fallacy* is categorized as a *fallacy* of inconsistency." Pulled from _wikipedia.org._
Pease explain how what Dogmaphobe said fits this definition. Or at least provide an accepted definition that explains your comment.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Your definition will do.  You guys don't get to reinterpret definitions.  He offered an equivalency, and I exposed it.


----------



## theHawk

JakeStarkey said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Banning a Person because of an opinion is totally different from banning a group of people who have a PROVEN record of violence, and a stated agenda of desroying you."
> 
> Fallacy of false equivalency is well represented above.
> 
> The great majority of Muslims don't do violence.
> 
> Religion cannot be a basis in America for banning people.  If it were, we would have gotten rid of the Presbyterians long time ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not banning them for their religion, it's banning them for their beliefs that are contrary to the principles of freedom.  They are the most intolerant and bigoted people on the planet.  We have every right to exercise whatever immigration policy we want.  There is nothing in the constitution that says we muban travel from Islamic nationsst have open borders to everyone.
> Islam is worse than Nazism, there is no reason we should tolerate either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All of that is your opinion.  Your type of langauge would fit right into Islamofascism in spirit.
> 
> What we can do is ban people from certain nations until we are satisfied certain individuals are not a threat.
Click to expand...


What language?  That's like saying its discrimination to ban the KKK from the NAACP.

You can't prove that it's anywhere in the constitution that we must take on these low life Muslims that hate everyone.

Banning people from certain countries would be a start, but it would be better to just ban Muslims from any country.  I'd rather we let Christians from Iraq in, than Muslims from Great Britain.  But, we'd still have the problem of vetting such people because they will just start lying to get in.  We should just shut down virtually all immigration from overseas.


----------



## JakeStarkey

This is absurd: _That's like saying its discrimination to ban the KKK from the NAACP_.

You cannot prove that we can't: Y_ou can't prove that it's anywhere in the constitution that we must take on these low life Muslims that hate everyone._

You are almost there, little buddy:  _Banning people from certain countries would be a start, but it would be better to just ban Muslims from any country. I'd rather we let Christians from Iraq in, than Muslims from Great Britain. But, we'd still have the problem of vetting such people because they will just start lying to get in. We should just shut down virtually all_ _immigration from overseas._


----------



## oldsoul

theHawk said:


> We should just shut down virtually all immigration from overseas.


 While I agree with SOME of your points, on this one, I have to vehemently disagree. There are a lot of areas I would have no problem with letting people come here from. That is, of course, if they come here within the confines of our laws, and can be properly vetted.


----------



## JakeStarkey

I know you far righties want to win so badly with Trump or Cruz.

Not going to happen.


----------



## HenryBHough

JakeStarkey said:


> I know you far righties want to win so badly with Trump or Cruz.
> 
> Not going to happen.



Please, Jammie-Boi, we understand you're going to find it very difficult ty say "President Trump" but with a little help from some charitable, responsible adult, you can get your lips around that, too.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> Your definition will do.  You guys don't get to reinterpret definitions.  He offered an equivalency, and I exposed it.


 Explain, that is what I asked. Can you explain yourself? I do not see the false equivalency. He/she asked you a question, and you dodged it by claiming a "Fallacy of false equivalency" (your words). It would seem as though you are unprepared to support your assertion.


----------



## JakeStarkey

HenryBHough said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know you far righties want to win so badly with Trump or Cruz.
> 
> Not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please, Jammie-Boi, we understand you're going to find it very difficult ty say "President Trump" but with a little help from some charitable, responsible adult, you can get your lips around that, too.
Click to expand...

You will be in hysterics after the GOP convention, little one, when Trump and Cruz are crushed.  Seek professional help.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> I know you far righties want to win so badly with Trump or Cruz.
> 
> Not going to happen.


 Where is this coming from? I don't see the relevance.


----------



## JakeStarkey

oldsoul said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your definition will do.  You guys don't get to reinterpret definitions.  He offered an equivalency, and I exposed it.
> 
> 
> 
> Explain, that is what I asked. Can you explain yourself? I do not see the false equivalency. He/she asked you a question, and you dodged it by claiming a "Fallacy of false equivalency" (your words). It would seem as though you are unprepared to support your assertion.
Click to expand...

oldsoul, you are not a referee.  There is no assertion.  It is explained.  It is trying to compare principles as equivalents.  They are not.  Trot along.

Follow the string and you will see the relevance.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know you far righties want to win so badly with Trump or Cruz.
> 
> Not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please, Jammie-Boi, we understand you're going to find it very difficult ty say "President Trump" but with a little help from some charitable, responsible adult, you can get your lips around that, too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You will be in hysterics after the GOP convention, little one, when Trump and Cruz are crushed.  Seek professional help.
Click to expand...

 Condescension will get you nowhere.


----------



## JakeStarkey

oldsoul said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know you far righties want to win so badly with Trump or Cruz.
> 
> Not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please, Jammie-Boi, we understand you're going to find it very difficult ty say "President Trump" but with a little help from some charitable, responsible adult, you can get your lips around that, too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You will be in hysterics after the GOP convention, little one, when Trump and Cruz are crushed.  Seek professional help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Condescension will get you nowhere.
Click to expand...

Then don't practice it.  Treat others as they treat you is the general rule.  The far right and the far left cannot hold a disciplined, respectful discussion here.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your definition will do.  You guys don't get to reinterpret definitions.  He offered an equivalency, and I exposed it.
> 
> 
> 
> Explain, that is what I asked. Can you explain yourself? I do not see the false equivalency. He/she asked you a question, and you dodged it by claiming a "Fallacy of false equivalency" (your words). It would seem as though you are unprepared to support your assertion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> oldsoul, you are not a referee.  There is no assertion.  It is explained.  It is trying to compare principles as equivalents.  They are not.  Trot along.
> 
> Follow the string and you will see the relevance.
Click to expand...

 Apparently, you cannot support your assertions and have little else to fall back on but condescension. Unfortunate, truely unfortunate.


----------



## oldsoul

JakeStarkey said:


> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know you far righties want to win so badly with Trump or Cruz.
> 
> Not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please, Jammie-Boi, we understand you're going to find it very difficult ty say "President Trump" but with a little help from some charitable, responsible adult, you can get your lips around that, too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You will be in hysterics after the GOP convention, little one, when Trump and Cruz are crushed.  Seek professional help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Condescension will get you nowhere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then don't practice it.  Treat others as they treat you is the general rule.  The far right and the far left cannot hold a disciplined, respectful discussion here.
Click to expand...

 Fortunatley for you, I have higher standards than that.


----------



## JakeStarkey

oldsoul said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oldsoul said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your definition will do.  You guys don't get to reinterpret definitions.  He offered an equivalency, and I exposed it.
> 
> 
> 
> Explain, that is what I asked. Can you explain yourself? I do not see the false equivalency. He/she asked you a question, and you dodged it by claiming a "Fallacy of false equivalency" (your words). It would seem as though you are unprepared to support your assertion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> oldsoul, you are not a referee.  There is no assertion.  It is explained.  It is trying to compare principles as equivalents.  They are not.  Trot along.
> 
> Follow the string and you will see the relevance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Apparently, you cannot support your assertions and have little else to fall back on but condescension. Unfortunate, truely unfortunate.
Click to expand...

My points have been easily supported, and that you can't or won't admit it is your issue, not mine, which shows your "higher standards".


----------



## JakeStarkey

Off to Las Vegas for the weekend.

Talk to you all later.


----------



## oldsoul

Intersting, someone attempts to understand his position, and he runs away.


----------



## theHawk

JakeStarkey said:


> I know you far righties want to win so badly with Trump or Cruz.
> 
> Not going to happen.




Poor Fakey, can't back anything up.


----------



## HenryBHough

theHawk said:


> Poor Fakey, can't back anything up.



Not even a toilet.


----------



## oldsoul

HenryBHough said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Poor Fakey, can't back anything up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not even a toilet.
Click to expand...

 Come on now "guys", Jake is not even here to defend himself. That is just not right.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

JakeStarkey said:


> Your definition will do.  You guys don't get to reinterpret definitions.  He offered an equivalency, and I exposed it.




All you exposed was your lack of intelligence and sense of principle. Mine was was a very apt comparison, as both are  totalitarian  ideologies that target any and all who do not join.

In my case, I would ban people based upon Ideology, so in my analogy, I would ban Nazis, but not those they were trying to exterminate.  Because you are a leftist  rather than a liberal, you would ban people from countries including those who are suffering persecution. In the same analogy, you would ban Jews from emigrating.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

JakeStarkey said:


> [.  The far right and the far left cannot hold a disciplined, respectful discussion here.




You are certainly extreme left , but who is extreme right here?


----------



## JakeStarkey

I am centrist, guys, and you on the far right think you are mainstream.  Once again, a presidential election season will show just how wrong you all can be.  The RCP lists five polls today that have Trump winning from 3 to 17 points.  The evangelicals in SC will have a gut check in the ballot booth and will decide today's election there.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

JakeStarkey said:


> I am centrist, guys, and you on the far right think you are mainstream.  Once again, a presidential election season will show just how wrong you all can be.  The RCP lists five polls today that have Trump winning from 3 to 17 points.  The evangelicals in SC will have a gut check in the ballot booth and will decide today's election there.




 By your stupid definition, Bill Maher would be considered "far right"

 Rejecting the advance of the all-encompassing ideology/political system of Islam does not make one a right winger because this system is the most ultra-conservative ideology imaginable.

 You aren't bright enough to figure this out, but what could possibly be any MORE conservative than a system that wishes to freeze humanity forever in the 7th century? 

 Learn to view the world without this childish need to label ideas that frighten you as as "far right"  and you just might begin to understand it.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Dogmaphobe said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am centrist, guys, and you on the far right think you are mainstream.  Once again, a presidential election season will show just how wrong you all can be.  The RCP lists five polls today that have Trump winning from 3 to 17 points.  The evangelicals in SC will have a gut check in the ballot booth and will decide today's election there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By your stupid definition, Bill Maher would be considered "far right"
> 
> Rejecting the advance of the all-encompassing ideology/political system of Islam does not make one a right winger because this system is the most ultra-conservative ideology imaginable.
> 
> You aren't bright enough to figure this out, but what could possibly be any MORE conservative than a system that wishes to freeze humanity forever in the 7th century?
> 
> Learn to view the world without this childish need to label ideas that frighten you as as "far right"  and you just might begin to understand it.
Click to expand...

Only in your silly mind, you goof ball.    I said nothing about not opposing Islamofascism. We just can't do it Donald's way is the point.  And if you are backing Donald, the you are supporting a lefty.

You label yet decry those who you think do the same, so you are a goof ball hypocrite.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

JakeStarkey said:


> Only in your silly mind, you goof ball.    I said nothing about not opposing Islamofascism. We just can't do it Donald's way is the point.  And if you are backing Donald, the you are supporting a lefty.
> 
> You label yet decry those who you think do the same, so you are a goof ball hypocrite.




I don't support Trump, child.

I was hoping Jim Webb would gain more traction because he was the only Democrat who I trusted as for as foreign policy is concerned, and he is moderately liberal,  otherwise.  

  Heck, if some sort of combination of he and Chris Christie were to run, somehow, I would vote for them over any other.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Dogmaphobe said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only in your silly mind, you goof ball.    I said nothing about not opposing Islamofascism. We just can't do it Donald's way is the point.  And if you are backing Donald, the you are supporting a lefty.
> 
> You label yet decry those who you think do the same, so you are a goof ball hypocrite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't support Trump, child.
> 
> I was hoping Jim Webb would gain more traction because he was the only Democrat who I trusted as for as foreign policy is concerned, and he is moderately liberal,  otherwise.
> 
> Heck, if some sort of combination of he and Chris Christie were to run, somehow, I would vote for them over any other.
Click to expand...

Hush, the adults are speaking.

That's a start for you.  Yes, Trump is not to be supported.

I like Kasich but he will end up VP material, perhaps.


----------



## Maggdy

DarkFury said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is a false OP, so noted and reported.  The OP correctly should be, "
> *Pegida Laments, "Trump is Right"*
> 
> 
> 
> *You care to point out what you are calling a "reported" feature in this OP?*
Click to expand...


I hope, I understand precisely the question. In any event, I will give an answer. Perhaps will be it useful.

Pegida not Europe, only a few residents.

"Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the West (German: Patriotische Europäer gegen die Islamisierung des Abendlandes), abbreviated PEGIDA or Pegida, is a far-right movement. Founded in Dresden in October 2014 that promotes anti-Islamic political positions. Pegida was founded by Lutz Bachmann, who runs a public relations agency in Dresden.
The movement has also opposed NATO and EU membership and has supported better relations with Russia.
Bachmann has a criminal record for sixteen burglaries, drunk driving, dealing cocaine and assault. In 1998, after Bachmann had been sentenced to several years in prison, he fled to South Africa but was deported back to Germany. According to Bachmann, during his time as a fugitive, he opened a nightclub in Cape Town. Bachmann is the owner of a public relations and advertising company in Dresden that he founded in 1992, and has been a publicist for nightclubs."


----------

