Who will Trump declare war on first?

[Kidlicious]

Who talked about ddefending the world from Sharia?
Not wanting to live under Sharia and not wanting to have the Sharia imposed in the land where you live in doesn't isn't the same as imposing your own will on other countries in the world (i.e. forcing other countries to get rid of the Sharia)
I should also add that the Republicans also don't seem to be serious about "defending the world from Sharia".
The government under both Bushs has workd happily together with Saudi Arabia, despite the fact that Sharia there sometimes is even strictr than in Iran (with no cinemas being allowed, women not being allowed to drive cars and some really despicable things (for example about the schoolgirls and the fire )
It is very clear that Trump also doesn't have any intention about "defending the world from Sharia", no surprise there, considering that his own companies are happy with doing business in Saudi Arabia.

Compare the reaction of liberals to a Muslim woman (who says she's a feminist) saying that another woman should be punished according to Sharia for criticizing Islam to a man saying that he grabs women by the vagina in a private conversation. That woman helped organize the woman's March. I think that is all that needs to be said about that.

,

I don't think the Electorate system is of any use against terrorism.
And it wouldn't even protect the world from Hitler 2 getting elected, considering how little resistance there was against Trump. The electors would as happily vote Hitler into power (if he got the majority of electors) as they did with Trump (especially considering that they both used similar populist methods in ordr to gain power)

Trump isn't Hitler. That is just your dirty lie.

,

Shouldn't one rather talk to the people who don't own any guns in order to find out what the majority thinks?
There are "just" around 55 million registered gun owners out of a population of 250 million adults, so the majority of US citizens doesn't own a gun.
(even if we take into account that one doesn't need to be a registered gun owner to have a gun at home (after all it could be that it is the spouse or parents to which the gun is registered) it is just 40% of US households which have a gun)

However, the polls are clear ... while there currently is a tiny majority of people who are supportive of the right to own guns, there is also a clear majority who want to have stricter regulations on teh sale of guns
See here:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx

Obviously your own people are elitists who want to take away the right of mentally unstable or mentally disabled people to freely buy a gun in order to defend themselves


(also you didn't say anything about the restrictions on the purchase of fully automatic rifles, tanks (with working guns), artillery pieces and AA by citizns? Don't you defend the right of citizens to defend themselves if baddies come with tanks, planes or come in so large numbers that you have to spray automatic fire in all directions? )

You don't understand how the Bill of Rights work. The majority can not take away that right. It can not be taken away.

We don't need tanks to defend ourselves.

[giblets]

Because it's very popular among liberals to treat muslims as victims, regardless of their beliefs. For example, one of the organizers for the Woman's March is an advocate for Sharia, and even called for women who criticize Islam to be punished according to Sharia Law. That and we have Canada on the verge of instituting a blasphemy law regarding Islam. How many countries in Europe already have these laws?

Anyone who is serious about defending the world from Sharia is NOT liberal. How could they be?

All aboard the crazy train

[Proteus_MST]

Trump isn't Hitler. That is just your dirty lie.

,
And I never claimed that Trump is Hitler.
It should be mentioned however that Breitbart, the news portal of Trumps bedfellow Bannon, has best contacts to the Neonazi movement (and is classified as alt right)
It should also be noted that Trump, just like Hitler, Putin and Erdogan, is a populist (and ,just like Hitler and Erdogan (and Putin earlier in his career), uses inflated terrorism scare in order to further his agenda (and even has similar slogans like the 3 ... with regards to letting your own home country come first)) therefore I have no doubt that someone similar to Hitler (and with the same intentions) would have no problem, getting voted by the electorate (just as I have no problem imagining that someone like Hitler would get the majority of electorate votes during he election)

You don't understand how the Bill of Rights work. The majority can not take away that right. It can not be taken away.

It can be taken away if 2/3 of members of the house of representatives and of the senate vote to repeal the amendment

We don't need tanks to defend ourselves.

Of course you need:
Example 1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnUoUKEIGoo

Example 2:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlZh9-NQEyI

Obviously concerned citizens armed with a Bazooka, Javelin or an MBT would have been able to stop those rampages within minutes

Likewise 9/11 obviously wouldn't have happened (at least not to such a degree) if concerned citizens would be allowed to arm themselves with AA weapons (most likely the plane that hit the 2nd towwer would have been shot down before reaching the tower)

[kentonio]

I'm sure Jefferson was no big fan of Sharia law.

Funny, I don't remember Vice President Jefferson having any issue with the Treaty of Tripoli which was not only signed with Muslims but which set into law with full congressional approval that..

"Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

[Aeson]

Trump has ended the war on ... puppy abusers. Or started the war on puppies.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/02/wildlife-watch-usda-animal-welfare-trump-records/

[giblets]

But what about the welfare of corporations that might be embarrassed if people know about their animal rights abuses? Corporations are people too!

[Proteus_MST]

One has to admit that the removal of the USDA database is one of the few negative things for which the Trump administration cannot be made responsible ... instead it was the USDA itself which stopped the public war on animal mistreatment ... after an internal review which already took place last year

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/02/03/the-usda-abruptly-removes-animal-welfare-information-from-its-website/?utm_term=.eb4b0f5f137e

[Aeson]

They always try to blame Obama for things they do that blow up in their face. USDA Press Secretary under Obama said the USDA gave them the option of whether to keep it up or take it down, they chose to keep it up. Trump admin must have chosen the option to take it down.

https://twitter.com/mattmherrick/sta...422272?lang=en

[Proteus_MST]

Oh that's an interesting twist.
In this case: Shame on Trumps administration

Guess it was done so Trump can grab his pussies without it getting entered into public available records for animal abuse

[Kidlicious]

The NY Times one upped your troll Proteus. According to them husbands are more dangerous than refugees and this is all to cover up violence against women. Why didn't you think of that?

[Proteus_MST]

Sorry, cannot think about every statistics .... there are so many things that are more dangerous than refugees ... cars for example .. or owners of firearms.
The annual percentage of victims of domestic violence in the USA surely also is much higher than the percentage of US citizens each year that get killed/wounded due to islamist terrorism.

But do you have a link to the article, where the NYT literally says that it means that husbands are more dangeours?

[Aeson]

Toddlers kill more Americans than refugees in terrorist attacks do. And it's not even close.

[Kidlicious]

Sorry, cannot think about every statistics .... there are so many things that are more dangerous than refugees ... cars for example .. or owners of firearms.
The annual percentage of victims of domestic violence in the USA surely also is much higher than the percentage of US citizens each year that get killed/wounded due to islamist terrorism.

But do you have a link to the article, where the NYT literally says that it means that husbands are more dangeours?

I'm not interested in having an argument with you about who is more dangerous, men or refugees. Go dig up your own man hate propaganda.

But yes, good point about auto drivers. Maybe we should deport them.

[Dinner]

Show me someone who claims there is a Muslim ban and I will show you a liar.

[giblets]

There is a muslim ban. Of course, in this new administration, black is white if Trump says so. Oerdin is a fascist, so naturally he marches in lock-step.