Trump wants to stop all Muslims from coming into the US

FN is even getting a good percentage of the Jewish vote.

Um no, they went into Iraq, a country that had not attacked the US, knowing full well they did not have solid intelligence, and is now widely known. Do you think going to war on intelligence you know is unreliable and contradicted by other intelligence, to exact regime change, is a "legitimate war aim"? There is no legitimacy in an invasion without merit, therefore collateral damage is not acceptable or an unfortunate consequence in those circumstances, it is a fundamental wrong.

MORE

LIES

Hey, even your usual go to shitrag the Daily Fail doesn't agree with you on this lie....

Yes.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/oct/02/mass-shootings-america-gun-violence

As El Chup said.

Async, you know full well I don't think all Americans shoot up high schools or support banning Muslims. If you have a problem with the word cunts, then replace it in your reading with guys. If you really want to be pedantic, I can edit the post to say a selection of American society choose to shoot up high schools on a monthly basis. You know full well its meant as a figurative term. And you know the argument was used to point out the inconsistency of approach to tragedy. Fortunately, only Gturner who is a cunt and an idiot by the way seems to be supporting Trump.

Nope, you can add @Dinner to that list as well.

The chick in the middle is a cutie pie.

I do not consider Trump a serious candidate nor have I ever said I would vote for him. I would like to see immigration reform as I have said multiple times. So far in this thread all I have done was correct you when you said something stupid about what was and was not constitutional.

So I cordially invite you to go fuck yourself.

Well let's see who has sworn allegiance, shall we? I'll call them "branches" because that's what they will or have become.

The Indonesian branches of ISIS are Mujahideen Indonesia Timor and Jemmah Islamiah.
The Philippine branches of ISIS are Ansar Al-Khilafah, Bangasamoro Islamic FF, Marakat al-Ansar, Ansar Al-Khilafah, and Abu Sayyaf.
The Algerian branches of ISIS are Junda al-Khilafah and the Skikda Battalion.
The Mali Branch is Al-Murabitoon.
The Nigerian branch of ISIS is of course Boko Haram, of course. State is thinking of deploying more hashtags there.
In Sadan the branch is Al-Attasa Belketab wa Al-Sunna.
In Egypt we have Junda al-Khliafah and just "ISIS"
In Libya there are three groups of ISIS that just call themselves ISIS.
In Tunisia they are the Mujahideen of Al-Qayrawan and the Uqba bin Nafi Battalion.
In Chechnya they're ISIS Caucasus.
In Afghanistan they're Ansar Tawhid and the tawhid battallion and the ISIS Khorasan
In Pakistan they're the Caliphate and Jihad Movement and Abtalul Islam Foundation.
In Saudi Arabia they're some long bizarre name.
In Yemen they're the Dhamar and Sana'a governorates, having switched allegiance from the Z man to Al Baghdadi.
In Palestine they're the Mujahideen Shura Council.

They're all over the place, and there's no way to know who is who among people coming from those countries.

That's Marion Le Pen.

And Jewish leaders (all socialists) are no doubt screaming about socialists getting their ass kicked at the polls, but some of the kicking is being done by Jews who are fed up with immigration and repeated attacks by Muslims.

Bullshit. Your rhetoric on here over the refugee crisis conforms exactly to what Trump is saying, and your arguing the legality of his measure is to support it's supposed legality.

Oh, and it's not clear cut at all. There has been case law in the US on points like this for over a century and a half and you wouldn't need to be asserting the opinion of "legal scholars" if it were cut and dried. Your research is clearly lacking.

You have offered no disagreement of Trump's proposal and you chickened out of the tough questions in this thread (like responding to my scenario above) because you don't want to admit that your bigotry is beyond doubt and your thinking intellectually weak.

Prove me wrong. Address the scenario I put to you above and also tell me with a yes or no, would you support the policy of exclusion of people based on religion? That's not a matter of whether or not it's legal, it's a matter of whether or not you support the idea irrespective.

I suppose you'll play the weak "which post are you referring to" game again now....?

Excluding Muslims by religion can already be done under existing US law. They have all engaged in religious discrimination (that's what Islam is) and thus could be rejected, just as we can already reject anyone who has engaged or assisted in discrimination against anyone on the basis of religion, ethnicity, or political beliefs.

Heck, the UK bars entry to US talk radio hosts. I think we can ban members of a wacko death cult.

Did I deny the existence of any of these groups?


Plus tell me what the membership size of these groups is? Do you have a clue? Boko Haram, for instance, is estimated to be between 500-9000 fighters.

So come on, set out the memberships for each of those groups, with links in support, and tell me what the percentage size is of 1.6 billion.


Oh...

Yeah....


Not gonna do that are you?

Ahhh, that's convenient. More

So you're now pretending you weren't trying to advance above a lie that Jewish were rushing to get behind the National Front?

As Chardman would have said....

And do we know the names of the members of all those groups? No, we don't. So when we accept refugees from any of those countries where those groups are operating, we have no way to know if they're ISIS agents.

Did you know we didn't allow immigrants here from the Soviet Union without a whole lot of questioning and monitoring, and never allowed them in in any large numbers? That's because we could never know if they were spies.

But we had additional protection because a spy is just trying to steal secrets, which we can guard, whereas these people want to slaughter people in shopping malls, dance clubs, and church picnics, which we can't.

Meh, probably bombs in those food parcels....

And yet it's still okay to you guys to allow gun obsessed white boys into Wal-Mart to buy an assault rifle.....

Laughable.

No, that's what's going on. I think FN got about 25 percent of the Jewish vote this round, not significantly less than they got overall. In the 2012 election they got 13.5 percent of the Jewish vote.

Now all Americans have to buy assault rifles to defend against Islamic attacks. When only Muslims have the assault rifles we end up with mass slaughter. We know that gun bans don't work. The cities with the tightest restrictions have the highest homicide rates, and ALL Muslims are allowed to have AK-47's, as are drug lords.

And hide under the bed, with their tinfoil hats tightly fastened, just to make sure.

I'm more worried about the girl on the right. They might throw stones at her and force her to live a subservient life.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhg, defending against Islamic attacks!

So those daily "defences against Islamic attacks" that are happening on a daily basis in the US, they don't seem to be going to well, as they're almost entirely taking out non-Muslims. I guess some needs to rethink their Islamist defence strategy.

Utter ludicrous drivel. It's people like you who unfairly cause Americans to be laughed at abroad.

No, we don't have to hide under the bed - because we have assault rifles. Although I did sell my last AR-15 platform. I'm just not satisfied with 5.56x45mm NATO. It lacks stopping power and mostly wounds. I would recommend that we switch to something maybe 6.5mm to 6.8mm. There's a good selection of cartridges and low base drag bullets to choose from. For a long time I favored the 6mm PPC for assault rifles, but it might have feeding problems, and some of the 6.5mm's can give better performance while maintaining its extreme accuracy.

So you can't provide the membership figures with links? That means your claim that ISIS was moving through Muslims everywhere was made when you have no proof that such an assertion was remotely true.

Gotcha.

This is why you were found out as a liar a long time ago.

Just cut the BS, Chup, you ignorantly claimed something was unconstitutional and you didn't have the first clue about what the constitution said. I mentioned a L.A. Times article on the very subject and while they condemned it two different constitutional law professors said it likely was legal but would require an act of Congress.

You only stop laughing at us to beg our civilians to send you guns whenever the continent erupts, which you do every single European war.

All gun laws in California did, which are among the strictest in the nation, is make sure that nobody at the Christmas party could defend themselves, even the Jew who was getting death threats the day before - probably from the shooters (according to his wife).

You're not good with logic are you? ISIS is in all those countries I listed. Their jihadist units have sworn allegiance.

You assert that since I can't provide you membership information for those units, we must allow immigration. You've got it backwards. If we knew who the jihadists were, with pictures and fingerprints and names, then we could filter them out from any ordinary people from those countries who wanted to come here. But we don't have that information, so we have no way of knowing who is a legitimate immigrant and who is being sent by ISIS.

And numbers don't matter as a percentage basis. We're not picking people randomly out of the phone book to choose who gets on the plane. They are entirely self-selected. If only five people from Tunisia are getting on the plane, all five might be part of the same ISIS unit as the only people in Tunisia who for some reason want to fly to the draw-Muhammed festive on Main Street USA.

http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/205670/why-are-so-many-french-jews-voting-for-front-natio/

I don't know what the percentage was in this election but in 2012 FN only got 13.5% of the Jewish vote.