Trump goes Big Brother yet again

Again, reporters are putting words in his mouth. http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...0926-trump-muslim-database-was-reporters-idea

Frankly, I don't see what's so terrible about a database of muslims. We have databases of taxpayers, property owners, welfare recipients,criminals, sex offenders and automobiles. Liberals want a database of all gun owners. They want a database of people who contribute to Tea Party groups. They want a database of people who contributed to the pro traditional marriage referendum in California. They want a database of KKK members. They seem to be all for databases, that is, except when it concerns muslims.

Democrats are trying to exploit the public's ignorance about islam by acting like it is just another religious belief. In truth, it is system of government with an aim for worldwide domination, just like communism. The goal of islam, as laid out in the koran, is to force sharia law on everyone. The default method of doing so is by force of arms and conquest. If a person is a koran-observing muslim, they have a religious duty to force sharia law on us.

The US outlawed membership in another political party, the Communist Party. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Control_Act_of_1954 Requiring muslims to register is far less intrusive than barring islam altogether. Ironically, most muslim countries do bar Christianity and other religions or burden its excercise excessively.

A high percentage of religious persecution around the world involves muslims attacking Christians and Jews. The reverse is virtually unheard of.
 
AAAintheBeltway said:
Again, reporters are putting words in his mouth. http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...0926-trump-muslim-database-was-reporters-idea

Frankly, I don't see what's so terrible about a database of muslims. We have databases of taxpayers, property owners, welfare recipients,criminals, sex offenders and automobiles. Liberals want a database of all gun owners. They want a database of people who contribute to Tea Party groups. They want a database of people who contributed to the pro traditional marriage referendum in California. They want a database of KKK members. They seem to be all for databases, that is, except when it concerns muslims.

Democrats are trying to exploit the public's ignorance about islam by acting like it is just another religious belief. In truth, it is system of government with an aim for worldwide domination, just like communism. The goal of islam, as laid out in the koran, is to force sharia law on everyone. The default method of doing so is by force of arms and conquest. If a person is a koran-observing muslim, they have a religious duty to force sharia law on us.

The US outlawed membership in another political party, the Communist Party. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Control_Act_of_1954 Requiring muslims to register is far less intrusive than barring islam altogether. Ironically, most muslim countries do bar Christianity and other religions or burden its excercise excessively.

A high percentage of religious persecution around the world involves muslims attacking Christians and Jews. The reverse is virtually unheard of.
More...

When did you become so radical? Even Ted Cruz shot down the database idea. And your link confirms he agreed that there should be a law requiring muslims to register. A page right out of Nazi Germany.
 
Like AAA said, there's also a constitutional right to bear arms and various other things that the left wants to have gov't databases of. So if Trump is taking a page right out of Nazi Germany, he's only following the lead of left. I guess the left is too stupid to realize that.
 
globuli said:
When did you become so radical? Even Ted Cruz shot down the database idea. And your link confirms he agreed that there should be a law requiring muslims to register. A page right out of Nazi Germany.
More...

OK, two points. One, I'm not advocating a data base of all muslims. It does seem to me that we should do something to keep track of muslim immigrants though. How else do we know what they are up to?

Two, it is just beyond obvious that the media is trying to attach Trump to ideas he hasn't proposed so they can undermine him. He is not a politician and is not as careful as he should be of what he says, so they know that and exploit it.

Keeping an eye on a potential fifth column during war is prudent. What strikes me as shocking is the President of the US being determined to let in tens or hundreds of thousands of potential jihadis with nothing in the way of a meaningful background check. And using dishonest and divisive rhetoric to attack those who object.
 
AAAintheBeltway said:
OK, two points. One, I'm not advocating a data base of all muslims. It does seem to me that we should do something to keep track of muslim immigrants though. How else do we know what they are up to?

Two, it is just beyond obvious that the media is trying to attach Trump to ideas he hasn't proposed so they can undermine him. He is not a politician and is not as careful as he should be of what he says, so they know that and exploit it.

Keeping an eye on a potential fifth column during war is prudent. What strikes me as shocking is the President of the US being determined to let in tens or hundreds of thousands of potential jihadis with nothing in the way of a meaningful background check. And using dishonest and divisive rhetoric to attack those who object.
More...

Keeping track of immigrants is a whole different ball of wax.Agreed on fifth column activity. But I'm not worried about the Syrian refugees as potential jihadis. They are leaving a war torn country with a dozen or more combating interests, which is a sensible thing to do. They may prove to be poor citizens but I don't see how a bona fide refugee should be considered a potential jihadi. I do not advocate throwing open the door to the Syrian refugees but think we can consider a measured, intelligent, and limited asylum program, one that won't pose a jihadist risk to our citizens.

I am concerned about ISIS members or other bad actors posing as refugees.
 
I think most of us would agree with that, but the problem is we have no way of knowing who is a legitimate refugee and who is a jihadi. Under the circumstances, it seems to me foolish to take the risk. If their co-religinionists in Saudi Arbia, Turkey, etc won't take the risk,why should we? Why is it our responsibility?

I think a better argument can be made that we should admit Christian refugees, as they are under a real threat of persecution and have no where else to go. Of course Obama will have no part of that. He could apparently care less what happens to them. In fairness, neither did President "Religion of Peace" Bush.
 
globuli said:
Keeping track of immigrants is a whole different ball of wax.Agreed on fifth column activity. But I'm not worried about the Syrian refugees as potential jihadis. They are leaving a war torn country with a dozen or more combating interests, which is a sensible thing to do. They may prove to be poor citizens but I don't see how a bona fide refugee should be considered a potential jihadi. I do not advocate throwing open the door to the Syrian refugees but think we can consider a measured, intelligent, and limited asylum program, one that won't pose a jihadist risk to our citizens.

I am concerned about ISIS members or other bad actors posing as refugees.
More...
They are not bonafide refugees. I suggest doing some homework. 80% of the Syrian refugees are not Syrian, and most are not fleeing ISIS. They are economic migrants.

You totally ignored AAA's point, btw. Liberals are all for databases - gun owners, tea party conservatives, anti-abortion activists, sex offender etc. You're just not for databases on a group Liberals politically protect - Muslims. Lets get real.

As for Trump, this is what I hate about him. Him and Carson will continue the wholesale NSA drag-netting. And if you think it's limited to call logs, think again. Snowden decimated that argument. ANd if you don't believe him, Google Wayne Madison (a real mid-level NSA analyst) and William Binney - two prominent NSA whistleblowers. William Binney was the civilian equivalent of a 1.5 General at the NSA. Fourth in Command. Had 2500 analysts working under him. Director of Operations. He quit after 911 because the entire Agency was being retasked not for terrorism, but population control, corporate espionage, and high-level political blackmail. Now ask yourself why CNN, FOX News, MSNBC won't even mention the name William Binney, let alone interview him.

The Government has no business compiling databases on citizens. Income, race, age, assets, political affiliation, gun ownership. Nothing. It's none of the Governments God-damned business. What do you suppose they use all that information for? To "keep us safe"???? What did Obamas IRS use it for? Dictators compile databases on gun owners before they collect the guns.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top