Jump to content

Off Topic, Kinda.....


Recommended Posts

Bit of a history lesson for those of you too young or choose to forget.

 

During the Iranian hostage crisis back in 1980 President Jimmy Carter banned Iranians from entering the US. 50000 Iranian students were ordered to report to immigration office to be deported if violation of their visa.

 

Oh by the way , Carter received the Nobel Peace Prize back in 2002...Here is an excerpt from article:

 

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261062/carter-banned-iranians-coming-us-during-hostage-daniel-greenfield

Now unlike Muslims, Iranians were not necessarily supportive of Islamic terrorism. Many were and are opponents of it. Khomeini didn't represent Iran as a country, but his Islamist allies. So Trump's proposal is far more legitimate than Carter's action. Carter targeted people by nationality. Trump's proposal does so by ideology.

Classifying Iranians as a group is closer to racism than classifying people by a racist supremacist ideology that calls for the mass murder and enslavement of non-Muslims, as ISIS is doing today.

One of the neater subsets of the 1952 Act barred the entry of, "(11) Aliens who are polygamists or who practice polygamy or advocate the practice of polygamy."

I wonder which creed this might apply to.

Maybe the professional conservatives running around shrieking their heads off can calm down now long enough to have a rational conversation on the subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Some lighthearted talk here plus this will make sure that I can read this again sometime as it's a good story, at least for me. If it wasnt for posting all those apartment stories I would forget almos

I debated posting this, because I might be overdoing this topic this week, but I made a sort of personal promise to myself that I am going to promote more positivity and try to never be negative or pu

Danny.... Thats a great attitude to have, and you will be amazed at the progress Owen can make with that kind of attitude and persistence on your part. On Feb 4, 2003, the diagnosis I got was that

Ya there was a revolution in Iran and the Shah, who was loved by the powers that be in the US was out and Ayatollah Khomeini, who had a mutual dislike for the US was in.

 

Funny how there's usually a hidden agenda.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to reiterate I am a 1000 percent against what Trump said in banning all Muslims..However we have to be more careful in who comes into the country especially from high risk countries that might have terrorists..

Link to post
Share on other sites

And now Mulclair says we should ban Trump from Canada.

 

Yes we should ban someone because they exercised their freedom of speech and we don't agree with them. Perfect!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think they have already banned Muslims coming across the border. A good friend of mine (Pakistan and Muslim) who is a lawyer wanted to go to Buffalo to go shopping. He was rejected and can't get into the USA.

 

I joke about that to him all the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a history lesson for those of you too young or choose to forget.

 

During the Iranian hostage crisis back in 1980 President Jimmy Carter banned Iranians from entering the US. 50000 Iranian students were ordered to report to immigration office to be deported if violation of their visa.

 

Oh by the way , Carter received the Nobel Peace Prize back in 2002...Here is an excerpt from article:

 

http://www.frontpage...niel-greenfield

 

Now unlike Muslims, Iranians were not necessarily supportive of Islamic terrorism. Many were and are opponents of it. Khomeini didn't represent Iran as a country, but his Islamist allies. So Trump's proposal is far more legitimate than Carter's action. Carter targeted people by nationality. Trump's proposal does so by ideology.

Classifying Iranians as a group is closer to racism than classifying people by a racist supremacist ideology that calls for the mass murder and enslavement of non-Muslims, as ISIS is doing today.

One of the neater subsets of the 1952 Act barred the entry of, "(11) Aliens who are polygamists or who practice polygamy or advocate the practice of polygamy."

I wonder which creed this might apply to.

Maybe the professional conservatives running around shrieking their heads off can calm down now long enough to have a rational conversation on the subject.

Just to clarify, this isn't an article. It's an op ed blog. There's a massive difference. Carry on.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because you think it's hate speech doesn't make it so.

 

holocaust deniers...hate speech?

those who think homosexuality is abnormal and should not be tolerated, and made illegal? Just freedom of expression?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

holocaust deniers...hate speech?

those who think homosexuality is abnormal and should not be tolerated, and made illegal? Just freedom of expression?

 

Depends where you're talking about. Denying the Holocaust in public is a crime in Germany, I believe.

 

"The First Amendment right to freedom of speech under the US constitution permits Donald Trump to make claims and proposals that others might deem unacceptable incitement."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends where you're talking about. Denying the Holocaust in public is a crime in Germany, I believe.

 

"The First Amendment right to freedom of speech under the US constitution permits Donald Trump to make claims and proposals that others might deem unacceptable incitement."

 

im talking about North America Dale. Are the things I noted hate speech in your opinion, or do you think the First Amendment means anyone can say pretty much anything?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I believe it was suggested that supporting Donald Trump and the Republican party is stupid and hateful..Thats why I wont engage in political discussions..

 

Finally went back to read this whole thing as I was only catching bits and pieces. I just wanted to point out that you called all democrats scum before anyone started in on the racists/stupid comments. Just saying ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and the president(any sitting president) does not have the ability to demand all guns be removed from people's hands. He has no authority. The Supreme Court would have a big issue with that. We have a constitution and there would need to be changes made to it to allow him the executive power to do such a thing. Also it's a a state issue. Supreme Court is not keen on federal mandates and let the states decide the gun laws. If it was as easy as you make it sound it would have been done long before Obama was in office. Also lol at making congress do it. With all the republicans getting $ from gun lobbies? Maybe if Obama can legally bribe them with more $?

 

Lol it's like Trump saying when he gets into office he is just doing away with free trade. Lol. He can't do that. He wouldn't have the power. Being President is not like being ruler of all things. There are many things in place to restrict and temper that power.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

CVwQQ1dWUAA_MGp.jpg

 

I was about to post the quote to my Facebook when I saw this actually, so I didn't bother. I know Americans have a different view of WW2 than most of the world, but it's an important thing to remember.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

im talking about North America Dale. Are the things I noted hate speech in your opinion, or do you think the First Amendment means anyone can say pretty much anything?

 

No, I don't think those things should be considered hate speech. I think it's a different story if I'm inciting or calling for people to do harm to homosexuals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal morality is shaped to a large degree by government and society.

 

I think the actions of the US government/military toward Muslims in the middle east probably plays a significant role.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fascinated by this election and am excited to see what happens in the primaries , which are not too far away.

 

It's really mind boggling the more Trump says something so outrageous and with a racist tone, the more his poll numbers go up. I was sure he was done after the Mexican comments and was POSITIVE the ridiculous notion of keeping all Muslims would be his deathnail. However his numbers are staggeringly getting better

 

I support and believe in a lot of his concepts but obviously can't defend his latest comment.

 

There are couple of theories, the people that have decided are all polling for Trump. While the undecideds are all anti Trump. Or there is a lot of the population that believes a lot of the stuff he says but would never repeat it themselves. The United States in some parts(especially the South) still is very racist and lives in the 50s.

 

I also think there is a possibility that this is all planned and with every comment he is calculatingly distancing himself from the Republican Party and will run as an independent.

 

I don't think there is any scenario that Trump will be POTUS, however with some success hopefully we will see more non traditional candidates running for political office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...