Donald J. Trump [OFFICIAL THREAD breaking news 10 Mar '23]

[Christianlady]

As if you needed another reason, and it's not as if he has a good chance anyway. 

 

But this is particularly disturbing, coming from a presidential candidate. 

 

The full story is here...

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/17/politics/donald-trump-obama-muslim-new-hampshire/

 

Cnn is trying to make main issue of the comments about Obama, but it is even more than that. 

Here is a portion of the exchange between Donald Trump and a genocidal anti muslim zealot 

at his rally. 

 

"We have a problem in this country. It's called Muslims," an unidentified man who spoke at a question-and-answer town hall event in Rochester, New Hampshire asked the mogul at a rally Thursday night. "You know our current president is one. You know he's not even an American."

A seemingly bewildered Trump interrupted the man, chuckling, "We need this question. This is the first question."

"Anyway, we have training camps growing where they want to kill us," the man, wearing a "Trump" T-shirt, continued. "That's my question: When can we get rid of them?"

"We're going to be looking at a lot of different things," Trump replied. "You know, a lot of people are saying that and a lot of people are saying that bad things are happening. We're going to be looking at that and many other things."

 

Hello Abu Hadl,

 

I personally don’t believe any Christian should vote for Trump either. It makes me sad how he demonizes people. :(

 

It makes me sad as well how the Republican party and the Democrat party demonize each other.  It has divided our nation and while thank God, people don’t kill each other over it, the division has encouraged people to be hateful to each other and to not even try to care for other people on the other side. :(

 

In Israel around 2,000 years ago, Jesus Christ shared a very important truth: (I boldened some and put Jesus’ words in red.)

 

Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand.” - Matthew 12:25 (ESV)

 

That is so true. People who hate other people in their community and divide into vicious groups against each other for whatever difference are really just destroying themselves, little by little. :(

 

Sadly, Donald Trump feeds off the hatred that some Americans have for other people. My husband, who had some issues with his immigration papers, would have been kicked out without mercy if Donald Trump were President. I am so thankful that he was not kicked out and that my parents, who love him and me, sponsored my husband. :) My husband has no desire to return to his native country of Ecuador. He loves the USA and he believes the USA has more opportunities nowadays than Latin American countries do. Many Latinos believe that, which is why they immigrate, either legally and illegally, to the USA. Most people who immigrate illegally do so because they cannot afford the cost and the wait that all the yucky red tape entails.

 

When I lived in Texas, a dear Mexican American friend prayed in a small church that God would protect a relative who was illegally crossing el Río at that moment. A Mexican American border control guard who was off duty put his hands over his ears when he heard her prayer. We all knew he was not going to even try to stop her relative from crossing.

 

Many awesome Americans were illegal immigrants. I have good friends who were illegal immigrants and who have had their cases represented by kind lawyers, thank God! The immigration system is sadly broken and needs fixed. Everyone who has loved ones who have suffered due to the broken immigration system knows that.

 

Most Latinos won’t vote for Donald Trump. My husband thinks he is amusing to watch though. :) We watched the second Republican debate and we joked that he even made Jeb Bush look good lol. (We don’t support Jeb Bush but we do like that he stood up for his Mexican-American wife!) We also agreed with Marco Rubio’s statements concerning speaking in Spanish. Our Cuban American friends support him; his story is inspiring. My husband and I speak Spanish at home and we have no issue with people speaking any language they so desire.

 

Anyways, as for me personally, I don’t even know if I will vote. I personally believe what Jesus Christ says concerning what is going on in the world before he returns (Matthew chapter 24 and Luke chapter 21). I believe that will happen regardless of any vote. One of my Atheist friends says that this makes the world worse because it brings negativism instead of optimism. While I understand that perspective and the idea of self-fulfilling prophecies, I do believe there’s a much greater spiritual struggle going on here than just what meets the physical eye.

 

Jesus Christ, who I love with my whole being, said the following, which I see happening:

 

And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another.  And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray.  And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold.  But the one who endures to the end will be saved.  And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. – Matthew 24:10-14 (ESV)

 

While Jesus’ followers throughout the centuries have believed Jesus’ return is near, it hasn’t been till modern technology was invented that the gospel could be "proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations." That’s why I personally believe the end will come soon (though I have no idea when exactly… only the Father knows.)

 

Jesus Christ however gives his followers very important advice:

 

 “But watch yourselves lest your hearts be weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and cares of this life, and that day come upon you suddenly like a trap.  For it will come upon all who dwell on the face of the whole earth.  But stay awake at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are going to take place, and to stand before the Son of Man.”

 

And every day he was teaching in the temple, but at night he went out and lodged on the mount called Olivet.  And early in the morning all the people came to him in the temple to hear him. – Matthew 24:34-38 (ESV)

 

Jesus Christ is coming, though when we don’t know. However, Christians should be focusing on preparing for Jesus’ return and obeying his commands to love neighbors as oneself and love enemies as we wait for him! :)

 

So anyways, I agree that Muslims should not vote for Trump, and I believe Christians shouldn't vote for him either.

 

Peace and God bless you

[hasanhh]

Assalamallikum,

 

Y'all real tired of those Maharajahs of Media smearing Trump all the time?

 

Here is a short article by someone who knows him:

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/a-personal-assessment-of-donald-trump/article/2572747

[Chaotic Muslem]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5-HEybU3k8

[Chaotic Muslem]

Wealthy Muslims helped Donald Trump build his empire

 

Well-paying tenants

Qatar Airways: The state-owned flag carrier of Qatar, a constitutional monarchy ruled by Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, has had a “corporate campus” in the Trump Tower on 5th Avenue in Manhattan since at least 2008. While details of the Qatar Airways lease were not immediately available, offices for rent in the building start at about $19,000 a month and can go above $100,000 a month. Qatar considers Islam the official religion and Sharia law the principal source of its legislation.

Saudi princes: Prince Mutaib bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, a former minister in the Saudi government, and member of the Saudi royal family, reportedly lives in a floor-through Trump Tower apartment. Other former Trump property tenants include Prince Nawaf bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, a Saudi royal family member who owned a 10,500 sq. foot (975 sq. meter) condo at the Heritage at Trump Place that went on sale this year for $48.5 million.

 

 

Prince Alwaleed’s buyouts

When Trump’s businesses empire crumbled in the 1990s, the high profile Saudi prince, known for investments from Citigroup to Hyundai, agreed to take majority control of New York’s Plaza hotel, giving Trump “more breathing room with bank creditors,” as The New York Times wrote in 1995. Four years earlier, Alwaleed purchased Trump’s nearly 300 foot yacht for $18 million as his Atlantic City casinos struggled.

 

 

Growing Middle East business

Earlier this year Bloomberg assessed Trump’s wealth at $2.9 billion, based mostly on the value of his real estate properties. But the Trump Organization’s profits are more dependent on “the parts of his company that slap his name on other people’s things,” as an in-depth article explained in September.

 

Trump International Golf Club: A club that Trump promises will exceed “all expectations” is at the center of a new real estate development called “Akoya” by DAMAC, a Dubai real estate development club. “It is great to be working with Damac Properties. Our ethos regarding quality is in sync,” Trump said when the deal was announced in May of 2014.

 

Trump Home: Dubai’s Landmark Group, which owns the Lifestyle retail chain, partnered this year with Trump Home, to sell Trump Home branded products to “the region’s style conscious consumer” who want “premium” brands. There are dozens of Lifestyle stores in Kuwait, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Update: On Dec. 9, the CEO of the Lifestyle chain, Sachin Mundhwa, said the company would pull all Trump Home products from their stores in the Middle East.

 

http://qz.com/568178/donald-trump-owes-much-of-his-fortune-to-wea/

 

This year is super ironic.

[Marbles]

So Trump was right when he claimed he has a very good relationship with Muslims...

It's just that Muslims can't come to the US under his presidency. No restrictions on Muslim money though.

[Noah-]

Well, the entire world do not consider these Gulf puppets as Muslims.... and Trump doesn't either. They are the 'slaves' who are owned by ppl like Trump. Lets say if tomorrow there was a ban on Muslims entry in the US, the masters will find ways to allow the slaves entry, like Wahabi and terrorist sponsors of Gulf or other slave states.

 

 

[Haji 2003]

If you draw parallels with the Jews in Germany, one of the key benefits of anti-semitism was the seizure of Jewish property/wealth. I've always wondered about the logic of Islamophobia because economically there isn't much wealth stored up in kebab shops and taxis.

However, the logic becomes a lot clearer if you consider that an ultimate goal could be the seizure/sequestration of the American/European based assets of the Arab sovereign funds.

While the oil keeps pumping I don't think it's a problem for the gulf monarchies. But at some point there will be a tricky cost-benefit issue for the west, it will be plain that the Arabs will need to start drawing down on their assets, if they are allowed to do this it will mean a significant transfer of wealth from west to east.

Sequestration, under the guise of the Muslim threat, then has massive benefits.

p.s. [added this a bit later]

Analysts have been remarking how the western media has recently been more willing to entertain criticism of Wahhabism. I think this is the beginning of a trend to make robust (economic and military) action against Saudi more palatable.

Muslims in the West will then have a choice, to ally themselves with the Wahhabi ideology and be seen as a 5th column or to adhere to some less extremist ideology.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Haji 2003

[Asad_127]

Salaamalikum,

I hope and pray that you all are in the best of health Inshallah. :')

I once heard that before our Imam Mahdi(ATFS)'s Zahoor or Reappearence, there would be a sudden turn away from Islam and Muslims would run away in droves.

I think it was used to describe conditions in the West, mainly North America and Europe. That something would make them run away from Islam. I don't know how true or accurate it is.

But, If Trump ends up winning, or any Anti-Muslim candidate wins and implements policies targeting Muslims and our life is in danger, what would you do as a Muslim living in North America or the United States? 

Would you leave then and there and goto Canada? Or Would you stay and try and survive it?

I ask this because, recently this is the first time I have heard so many things targeting Muslims. Like the Mandatory Databases Story or Banning all Muslims from entering the US etc. 

I don't wish to speculate because I don't know, but to me, its kind of akin to Germany before and during World War 2, it just feels like that somehow. They would make the Jewish people wear something that would single them out easily, with which they were easy to identify etc. And then we all I think know about the Warsaw Ghetto etc. and what happend next. :'( 

But yeah, what would you do? I know this is different and congress still has to approve any major decisions which are made and they vote on it. There is still some balance of power if I remember lol. But our Media is so silent on this. When before they wouldn't be as much.

What would you do? How would you prepare?

Best Regards

-Asad_127       

[LeftCoastMom]

It's unconstitutional. There would be a backlash and likely an impeachment and Trump knows it. Trump's unlikely to win and even if he does he's not really interested in doing any of that. He's trawling  for votes. He will have no compunction about ignoring that faction of his supporters if he gets into office. I'm more concerned about the economy under him, not civil rights. Trump could care less about religion or almost anything else he's pretending to give two hoots about. He just wants to make it easy for the bu$ine$$ interests do to as they please. He'll be  delighted to roll in Muslim money, too.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

There is a major balance of power. The President does not do as he or she pleases. The Bill of Rights is a foundation of American Law and society. Congress is loathe to mess with it. Just look at the trouble we have getting gun control due to the Second Amendment. Plus, any Constitutional Amendment at all ,leave alone the first ten that comprise the Bill of Rights, must be ratified by 3/4 of the States. Good luck on that. There is not going to be an abridgment on religion freedom for Muslims because that would destroy all religious rights for everyone and no one is going to open that can of worms. Now, unofficial harassment by wingnut groups,etc. might go on due to the freedom of speech rights, but there are limits to that as well.

 

Edited January 10, 2016 by LeftCoastMom
Added first Amendment

[Gaius I. Caesar]

7 hours ago, Asad_127 said:

Salaamalikum,

I hope and pray that you all are in the best of health Inshallah. :')

I once heard that before our Imam Mahdi(ATFS)'s Zahoor or Reappearence, there would be a sudden turn away from Islam and Muslims would run away in droves.

I think it was used to describe conditions in the West, mainly North America and Europe. That something would make them run away from Islam. I don't know how true or accurate it is.

But, If Trump ends up winning, or any Anti-Muslim candidate wins and implements policies targeting Muslims and our life is in danger, what would you do as a Muslim living in North America or the United States? 

Would you leave then and there and goto Canada? Or Would you stay and try and survive it?

I ask this because, recently this is the first time I have heard so many things targeting Muslims. Like the Mandatory Databases Story or Banning all Muslims from entering the US etc. 

I don't wish to speculate because I don't know, but to me, its kind of akin to Germany before and during World War 2, it just feels like that somehow. They would make the Jewish people wear something that would single them out easily, with which they were easy to identify etc. And then we all I think know about the Warsaw Ghetto etc. and what happend next. :'( 

But yeah, what would you do? I know this is different and congress still has to approve any major decisions which are made and they vote on it. There is still some balance of power if I remember lol. But our Media is so silent on this. When before they wouldn't be as much.

What would you do? How would you prepare?

Best Regards

-Asad_127       

Why would I go to Canada, I would live anywhere but the continent of North America.

[Asad_127]

54 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

It's unconstitutional. There would be a backlash and likely an impeachment and Trump knows it. Trump's unlikely to win and even if he does he's not really interested in doing any of that. He's trawling  for votes. He will have no compunction about ignoring that faction of his supporters if he gets into office. I'm more concerned about the economy under him, not civil rights. Trump could care less about religion or almost anything else he's pretending to give two hoots about. He just wants to make it easy for the bu$ine$$ interests do to as they please. He'll be  delighted to roll in Muslim money, too.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

 

 

Salaamalikum :') 

Well let me ask you this. Is wiretapping or the patriot act constitutional? How about waterboarding? 

The fact of the matter is, there is no first amendment in reality. It's nonsense. There is no freedom of speech. There's no free media. They all toe the line. The right of the people to peaceably assemble is not true either. I protested once and police asked me to move somewhere else or they would arrest me. 

If there were freedom of speech, SC would let us air our grievances in public but they don't lool. :') I'm just kidding lol. 

So yeah there is no first Amendment. We have no rights. :') 

Edited January 10, 2016 by Asad_127

[Sumayyeh]

54 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

It's unconstitutional. There would be a backlash and likely an impeachment and Trump knows it. Trump's unlikely to win and even if he does he's not really interested in doing any of that. He's trawling  for votes. He will have no compunction about ignoring that faction of his supporters if he ......

^Excellent points LCM

 However I've noticed so often our amendment/constitutional rights are trampled on (like racial profiling in airports), or a President wages war without Congress' Approval, or the right to a Court (but only if you can afford a lawyer), and so on.  In the case of Trump, don't you think he'll likely find a way--like a loophole or something to justify himself? 

[Asad_127]

5 minutes ago, Sumayyeh said:

^Excellent points LCM

 However I've noticed so often our amendment/constitutional rights are trampled on (like racial profiling in airports), or a President wages war without Congress' Approval, or the right to a Court (but only if you can afford a lawyer), and so on.  In the case of Trump, don't you think he'll likely find a way--like a loophole or something to justify himself? 

I second this post.

You have to understand, if the president needs something done, they will get congress to pass it. You mentioned gun control, that has nothing to do with congress or the president but everything to do with the NRA. It's one of the strongest lobbies and they pay big money to keep congress from doing anything. If it wasn't in existence, GOP would support gun control the next day. It's not that hard to think about. Just look at our nation post 9/11. All the president has to do is play the fear card and prove his point, like false flags etc.

[LeftCoastMom]

Doing the things the OP described would require blatant violations of the Constitution, not just borderline disputed illegal things such as racial profiling, bad as it is and an actionable offense, Congress authorizing the President to stretch the 1973 War Powers Acts ( they can still deny funding and,in fact,have),or public defender office underfunding and case overload ( the Sixth Amendment still applies,though)..so ,even if he could,which he can't... I don't think he would or wants to try to monkey with the Constitution just to discomfit Muslims. That would initiate a Constitutional crisis for religious freedom and the actions would be struck down by the Supremes tout suite. In fact, the only way I could see Trumpo trying it would be with the knowledge that the  Supremes would kill it so he could blame not getting it done on them. But I don't think he would risk impeachment just to please the wingnuts he is currently lying to about his " concerns" about Muslims. I don't think he really cares about Muslims. He'd be happy to have any rich American Muslims fund him or as business partners. I don't think he has many actual concerns about Islam or "terrorism."

[baradar_jackson]

What would I do if Trump became president? Nuthin'

 

All this "going to Canada" stuff is like an emo teenager threatening to run away from his parents. "Liberal," "democrat" types make these threats every election year.

 

Also: what makes Canada so great? Canada is just the version of Murica that remained a British "common""wealth." Is that something to be proud of? Being Murica Jr?

[Abu Hadi]

I think people are underestimating the serious nature of this issue. 

I don't think he has a good chance of winning, but he is still the Republican front runner with only a few months before the Republican convention where they nominate their candidate. 

He is very dangerous because he is not a typical politician. In the past, there were some limits that a normal politician would not cross, not because they care about things like 'the people', 'the Constitution', etc but because they wanted to be viable as a candidate in the future, i.e. they were worried about career and reputation in the future. 

Trump doesn't seem to care about any of that. He is old, and he knows he doesn't have that many more years left on earth. He is power hungry and after becoming a 'legend'. He is looking for any kind of short term gain he can get for himself like media coverage, name recognition, etc. He has no religion, no morals and no ethics and he is willing to cross any line to get what he wants. There is a population, though very far from the majority, that are his die hard supporters. Because all the other candidates and their supporters are so fractured into different smaller groups, (except maybe Hillary) he may have a chance. 

His style and tactics remind me of Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan(la). We know that Muawiya(la) did take power long enough to implant his son Yazid(la) into the Caliphate for a short time, with very disastrous consequences. I don't think we should panic, but yes I do think we should have a strategy to deal with a reality of a Trump presidency. If you underestimate people like this, you do so at your own peril. 

[LeftCoastMom]

10 hours ago, Asad_127 said:

Salaamalikum :') 

Well let me ask you this. Is wiretapping or the patriot act constitutional? How about waterboarding? 

The fact of the matter is, there is no first amendment in reality. It's nonsense. There is no freedom of speech. There's no free media. They all toe the line. The right of the people to peaceably assemble is not true either. I protested once and police asked me to move somewhere else or they would arrest me. 

If there were freedom of speech, SC would let us air our grievances in public but they don't lool. :') I'm just kidding lol. 

So yeah there is no first Amendment. We have no rights. :') 

I've protested more times than I can count. Backed the police down more times than I can count. Had the Feds literally come into the school district to protect my kids on First Amendment and civil rights violations against them. We have rights. 

[LeftCoastMom]

10 hours ago, Asad_127 said:

I second this post.

You have to understand, if the president needs something done, they will get congress to pass it. You mentioned gun control, that has nothing to do with congress or the president but everything to do with the NRA. It's one of the strongest lobbies and they pay big money to keep congress from doing anything. If it wasn't in existence, GOP would support gun control the next day. It's not that hard to think about. Just look at our nation post 9/11. All the president has to do is play the fear card and prove his point, like false flags etc.

The NRA has nothing without the Second Amendment. The Amendment is what gives it  teeth. Countries without the right to bear arms usually have far less problem controlling them. Obama would like stricter gun control , more health care, and a lot of  things he hasn't been able to pass through Congress. There are a lot of checks on Presidential power, formal and informal. Your post just proved my point. Trump will face the same. I think he would be a major mess for this country, but he won't just run rampant.

Edited January 10, 2016 by LeftCoastMom

[hasanhh]

^^^^I was listening to the pinko-feminist-propaganda forum, To the Contrary, and this week they were citing a study that 60 or 70 or 80 % of women are now buying firearms. I forget the number.

The panel was aghast that women are buying firearms --particularly they hounded the Orwellian  "but the children"/"the children" sob stuff.

[LeftCoastMom]

11 hours ago, Asad_127 said:

Salaamalikum :') 

Well let me ask you this. Is wiretapping or the patriot act constitutional? How about waterboarding? 

 

Yes, wiretapping with a warrant on American citizens is constitutional . The NSA's " broad " form of warrantless wiretapping in possible violation of FISA laws might be unconstitutional and the Supreme Court has refused the case so far, in my understanding, on lack of standing. That could easily change and the Court could have a case brought ,probably again by the ACLU,and rule.

Same with parts of the Patriot Act. Everything gets measured against the Constitution. 

 

[Sumayyeh]

7 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

 

He is very dangerous because he is not a typical politician. In the past, there were some limits that a normal politician would not cross, not because they care about things like 'the people', 'the Constitution', etc but because they wanted to be viable as a candidate in the future, i.e. they were worried about career and reputation in the future. 

 

And just to add to Br. Abu Hadi's points, even if he doesn't win (a bit of a stretch), look at the danger of how normalizing it's becoming to make such blatant remarks simply on the basis of religion. It's not only  totally Ok for a primary candidate--it leaves them to be front runner. Even if he doesn't get elected, what does this type of rhetoric and fear-mongering do in the long-run? And for the safety of Muslims living in America? Getting through day to day life?

[LeftCoastMom]

11 minutes ago, Sumayyeh said:

And just to add to Br. Abu Hadi's points, even if he doesn't win (a bit of a stretch), look at the danger of how normalizing it's becoming to make such blatant remarks simply on the basis of religion. It's not only  totally Ok for a primary candidate--it leaves them to be front runner. Even if he doesn't get elected, what does this type of rhetoric and fear-mongering do in the long-run? And for the safety of Muslims living in America? Getting through day to day life?

IMHO, it just makes Trump look like a jerk. Even his fellow Republicans are slamming him for it. 

He's after all the old bugaboos...illegal immigrants, etc. ..but it's all rhetoric. 

He knows undocumented labor is a sad pillar of ag and factory economy in this country and he knows Muslims aren't a real threat ...has " Muslim friends" ...lol!

you're right...he's less of a threat than his shrinking demographic of wingnut followers. I've always said they would try to do some damage on their way out. So best thing is to fight them using several available tactics, including getting politically active.

personal note: The " progressive/ liberals" in politics, often bashed here and whose number would include the two serving Muslim members of the US Congress, are probably your best bet if you want your civil rights protected. Just sayin'.

[Sumayyeh]

@LeftCoastMom Did you see the Muslim lady who was escorted out of the Trump rally? Omg, she had some guts...

 

 

[LeftCoastMom]

2 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

Yes, wiretapping with a warrant on American citizens is constitutional . The NSA's " broad " form of warrantless wiretapping in possible violation of FISA laws might be unconstitutional and the Supreme Court has refused the case so far, in my understanding, on lack of standing. That could easily change and the Court could have a case brought ,probably again by the ACLU,and rule.

Same with parts of the Patriot Act. Everything gets measured against the Constitution. 

 

 

13 hours ago, Asad_127 said:

Salaamalikum :') 

 How about waterboarding? 

 

Lol...forgot this. Waterboarding is definitely against several Constitutional  amendments and against international law on torture. The issue there is the US agreeing with that definition of torture and whether federal law applies in overseas situations. You'll notice American citizens in jail on US soil aren't waterboarded. The one idiot sheriff in Texas who tried it whilst Bush was Governator there was prosecuted, convicted...and Bush did not pardon him. There have been US soldiers prosecuted in history for it as well.  

[LeftCoastMom]

8 minutes ago, Sumayyeh said:

@LeftCoastMom Did you see the Muslim lady who was escorted out of the Trump rally? Omg, she had some guts...

 

 

And you see how much press she is getting. Lots. She is using one tactic to expose Trump's followers and daylight their behavior. Good for her. 

[LeftCoastMom]

4 hours ago, hasanhh said:

^^^^I was listening to the pinko-feminist-propaganda forum, To the Contrary, and this week they were citing a study that 60 or 70 or 80 % of women are now buying firearms. I forget the number.

The panel was aghast that women are buying firearms --particularly they hounded the Orwellian  "but the children"/"the children" sob stuff.

You mean 80% ...or whatever... of current gun-buyers are now women?

I doubt 80% of women are armed. Lol. 

Disclaimer from the Leftist Coast:

I am a true "libtard"and never let my kids play with toy guns.

Guns are not toys.

I let them use real ones.

I made sure all my kids knew how to use a gun, under proper instruction, whether or not they want to own one.  Daughter is a certified expert level. 

[LeftCoastMom]

2 hours ago, Sumayyeh said:

Even if he doesn't get elected, what does this type of rhetoric and fear-mongering do in the long-run? And for the safety of Muslims living in America? Getting through day to day life?

 

9 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

 I do think we should have a strategy to deal with a reality of a Trump presidency. If you underestimate people like this, you do so at your own peril. 

Okay, first if all, if it were me, I'd be contributing to the legal  war chests of the ACLU and organizations like CAIR. They'll likely be bringing the lawsuits.

also, I'd make sure nothing that came out of his or his followers mouths regarding Muslims went unanswered.

I'd  get incredibly politically active and form Muslim political action groups, preferably with allies, to officially challenge him.

There are other things, but the idea is to put up a good strong intelligent " American-style" resistance and not look like easy prey.

 

 

 

[Sumayyeh]

14 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

 

Okay, first if all, if it were me, I'd be contributing to the legal  war chests of the ACLU and organizations like CAIR. They'll likely be bringing the lawsuits.

also, I'd make sure nothing that came out of his or his followers mouths regarding Muslims went unanswered.

I'd  get incredibly politically active and form Muslim political action groups, preferably with allies, to officially challenge him.

There are other things, but the idea is to put up a good strong intelligent " American-style" resistance and not look like easy prey.

Glad you mentioned CAIR--that organization actually helped secure my community's rights in terms of getting a license to build a Masjed (mosque)....I mean we had to go through so much just to have that simple right, because the neighbors complained lol.

You guys mentioned waterboarding in the posts above...that is no joke. Or, the racial discrimination against African American and police...

[LeftCoastMom]

We all cut our teeth on native tribal rights and racial discrimination around here. In fact, will be in court again on treaty rights shortly.

 

People need to "warrior up "when folks try to step on them, figuratively speaking, like you did with the mosque. Don't let them get away with it. The LGBTQI etc. community in the US did and they had far fewer legal protections than Muslims do with Constitutionally guaranteed religious freedom. 

Edited January 10, 2016 by LeftCoastMom

[Abu Hadi]

3 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

 

Okay, first if all, if it were me, I'd be contributing to the legal  war chests of the ACLU and organizations like CAIR. They'll likely be bringing the lawsuits.

also, I'd make sure nothing that came out of his or his followers mouths regarding Muslims went unanswered.

I'd  get incredibly politically active and form Muslim political action groups, preferably with allies, to officially challenge him.

There are other things, but the idea is to put up a good strong intelligent " American-style" resistance and not look like easy prey.

 

 

 

The one bright spot in a Trump presidency would be that it would unite (if only temporarily) every group from moderate muslim professionals and intellectuals to legal and illegal immigrants to the left and the moderate Republicans (if there is such a thing anymore) against him. This would be something to see, and I don't think I've ever seen this nor thought I'd see it in my lifetime. It would be crazy in the streets, that's for sure. 

Edited January 11, 2016 by Abu Hadi

[LeftCoastMom]

That would be great for you guys and I would like to watch that...

but what do I know?

I used the Trump insult generator and got this:

Donald J. Trump
@TrumpInsulter
LeftCoastMom is a dummy. Just look at LeftCoastMom's past.
10 JAN 2016

 

 

[Asad_127]

On 1/10/2016 at 3:13 AM, LeftCoastMom said:

Doing the things the OP described would require blatant violations of the Constitution, not just borderline disputed illegal things such as racial profiling, bad as it is and an actionable offense, Congress authorizing the President to stretch the 1973 War Powers Acts ( they can still deny funding and,in fact,have),or public defender office underfunding and case overload ( the Sixth Amendment still applies,though)..so ,even if he could,which he can't... I don't think he would or wants to try to monkey with the Constitution just to discomfit Muslims. That would initiate a Constitutional crisis for religious freedom and the actions would be struck down by the Supremes tout suite. In fact, the only way I could see Trumpo trying it would be with the knowledge that the  Supremes would kill it so he could blame not getting it done on them. But I don't think he would risk impeachment just to please the wingnuts he is currently lying to about his " concerns" about Muslims. I don't think he really cares about Muslims. He'd be happy to have any rich American Muslims fund him or as business partners. I don't think he has many actual concerns about Islam or "terrorism."

I disagree with this too. I don't know if you've read about it but a while back, there was a huge controversy in Indiana and Ohio about gays and bakeries. Christian bakery owners refused to sell wedding cakes to people who were gay because of their Religion and the gay people wanted a wedding cake with two females or two males. Which goes against the concept of Marriage that we believe in. They were sued and ultimately some even had to shut down. They argued that it was their religious freedom but they were denied. There has been many other incidents similar also. If a Christian or Muslim were to goto a "Gay Friendly" bakery and ask for a wedding cake with a Male and a Female, they would be discriminated against the same way. This has happend too. But nothing happens to the Gay Bakeries. Point is, there isn't really any religious freedom anymore. Try exercising your religious freedom at a Walmart and refuse to sell alcohol or work as a teller and refuse something minor. They don't care about religious freedoms. :')

On 1/10/2016 at 11:55 AM, LeftCoastMom said:

The NRA has nothing without the Second Amendment. The Amendment is what gives it  teeth. Countries without the right to bear arms usually have far less problem controlling them. Obama would like stricter gun control , more health care, and a lot of  things he hasn't been able to pass through Congress. There are a lot of checks on Presidential power, formal and informal. Your post just proved my point. Trump will face the same. I think he would be a major mess for this country, but he won't just run rampant.

What is the second amendment specifically? It's the right to bear arms. That can be twisted to fit whatever purpose they want it to fit. Hence bearing arms can mean something as little as a pocket knife etc. It's very vague. Which makes my point very clear too lol. The NRA lobby is strong and that is why the second amendment fits the current definition of what it does lol.  

On 1/10/2016 at 5:04 PM, LeftCoastMom said:

 

Okay, first if all, if it were me, I'd be contributing to the legal  war chests of the ACLU and organizations like CAIR. They'll likely be bringing the lawsuits.

also, I'd make sure nothing that came out of his or his followers mouths regarding Muslims went unanswered.

I'd  get incredibly politically active and form Muslim political action groups, preferably with allies, to officially challenge him.

There are other things, but the idea is to put up a good strong intelligent " American-style" resistance and not look like easy prey.

I totally agree with this. Actually @Abu Hadi had a topic which discussed something similar. We have to make lobbies and have unity to face these challenges. Imagine if we had a Muslim Lobby similar to AIPAC. It is truly sad that the Armenian Lobby is so strong and our Arab Lobbies aren't. Money buys people(in this case Politicans) their jobs depend on it. Hence they would listen to our opinions and do we say. Otherwise they would lose our vital contribitons and eventually their jobs. Media, Businesses, Everything we need to have a presence in if we are going to succeed. 

[hasanhh]

7 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

You mean 80% ...or whatever... of current gun-buyers are now women?

I doubt 80% of women are armed. Lol. 

Disclaimer from the Leftist Coast:

I am a true "libtard"and never let my kids play with toy guns.

Guns are not toys.

I let them use real ones.

I made sure all my kids knew how to use a gun, under proper instruction, whether or not they want to own one.  Daughter is a certified expert level. 

I re-watched it on the net. The premise piece said:

Episode Title: "08Jan16 "the Well-Armed Women"

-the majority of women have been in favor of 'gun-control' "for decades"

now, 1/3 of women who own guns "bought them recently"

-women's gun ownership "rose 80% from 2004-2011

In the whining (or whinnying) session, Congresswoman Norton was making statistics up, such as -and no joke- that "60% of guns in the home go for suicide"  opine: what a shameless ___ she is. then how-come there isn't a massive drop in population?

The NIH in the late 80s had in their Cause of Death statistics that all gun deaths for that year -murder, suicide, accidents- was a cause of death that ranked between blood poisoning and kidney failure.

[LeftCoastMom]

@Asad_127 ( Love your avatar,btw)

First, the gay wedding cake issue was not a religious freedom issue. A religious freedom issue would be not allowing you to go to your mosque or church or interfering with your practice of religion in some of the ways Trump is supposedly supporting. So everyone still has plenty of religious freedom.

You do not have a "religious right "to run a business and break the law. 

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids discrimination in " places of public accommodation". Many states also forbid discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. If you pull a business license you should know basic business law,just as if you get a driver's license you should know basic rules of the road. Ignorance of the law does not mean the law ceases to exist or that you will not be punished for violating it.

You can, within limits, avoid this by running your business as a private co-op or club not open to the public. You will probably lose tax breaks and other benefits, but that will allow you to serve whom you please as long as you do not cross the line into " public accommodation" territory again.

The Civil Rights Act is basic US history , has been the law ,and has been upheld for 50 years now as a part of the fabric of the common good of our society ,started as a response to white-owned businesses refusing service to black customers in the South and was expanded to include protections for race, religion, ethnic origin, etc. There is no excuse for a business owner to not know it by now, IMHO.

As well, one wonders if those "strict "Christians refused divorcees wedding cakes ( remarriage after divorce, unlike in Islam, is considered adultery by many evangelical Christians). Did they make second time brides and grooms bring in the death certificates of their former spouses ( the only way they are spiritually free of the first marriage ?)

One of those bakers admitted he'd made a wedding cake for two dogs. (The article didn't say if the dogs were the same gender or not)

I have not heard of " gay friendly bakeries" refusing straight couples wedding cakes. Where are those cases?

As well, it is your job to do your due diligence and decide if you can take or keep a job at a place that violates  your religious principles. That is not the job of WalMart. If Walmart sells pork and you convert to Islam and perhaps feel you can't sell it ,they may make accommodations for you...or not. That is not violating your religious freedom as you are not forced to work there. You cannot force your religious beliefs onto your employer. If you were, say, imprisoned and forced to work a prison job, different matter. The State may have some accountability there.

**********

 

The right to bear arms, in American common law understanding, has meant fire-arms, due to its tie to a " militia', the primary weapon of which was a firearm at the time of the framing of the Amendment.

It is usually defined thusly: "light infantry weapons which can be carried and used, together with ammunition, by a single militiaman, functionally equivalent to those commonly used by infantrymen in land warfare." 

Knives, axes,shovels, rakes, picks, etc, can be weapons, but they are primarily considered tools and are commonly used for other things. Guns are meant to be weapons.

 

Hope this helps.

Edited January 11, 2016 by LeftCoastMom

[hasanhh]

10 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

 

Lol...forgot this. Waterboarding is definitely against several Constitutional  amendments and against international law on torture. The issue there is the US agreeing with that definition of torture and whether federal law applies in overseas situations. You'll notice American citizens in jail on US soil aren't waterboarded. The one idiot sheriff in Texas who tried it whilst Bush was Governator there was prosecuted, convicted...and Bush did not pardon him. There have been US soldiers prosecuted in history for it as well.  

The Bush Administration, a.k.a. la Boche, chose waterboarding because they knew it was pointless and no way to gain information. You saw it also in the man who was chosen to lead the interrogation -forgot name- who had no experience in interrogation. Reason: he would not know any better. Then there was the man that got imprisoned later for talking to reporters, his actions were directed over the phone by Cheney et alia: "now, slap him again", etc.

The purpose of all this nonsense was to get the prisoners -most handed over to the US for the monetary rewards- to say anything that could be used to justify pre-determined policy decisions. The infamous "cherry picking", such as using fire engines as flamethrowers or filling apartments with TNT and other such crazy stuff so as to panic the public.

And besides the "say anything under duress" garbage there as Abu Zubedah (sp?) who the FBI said publically at the time he was insane --and so medically determined later. Which is one reason -besides the above and others- why the FBI and other trained interrogators were restricted/barred from access to the prisoners. [Every Armed Service has an interrogator school and there was literally a pool of thousands from which to draw upon -even native Arabic speakers.]

As for gaining information, that is extremely easy. The interrogation "technicians" administer one of several drugs, three of which are commercially available, the effects of which is: "You walk, you Talk, but you are not conscience and you do not remember anything." Just like we were told in "POW Class" within Survival, Evasion and Escape Classes.  And as far as the "technical" goes, I myself went through that.

But the Guantanomo victums were the lucky ones. Others were held in cargo containers until they died, slowly.