quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
My opinion is that the threat of terror attacks in the US is overblown and the hysteria engendered by Trump is exactly the purpose of terror . . making people afraid.

It's definitely not a threat on the same level that Trump/Bannon want it to be and are trying to make it... but there is always a threat. It's not like the US doesn't have a lot of enemies, or like they're actually taking steps to build bridges... or even that it's possible to build bridges at all.

And it's not just about making people afraid... I really wish it were, but Bannon has already openly stated that he actually wants a war with the Muslim world and that Trump doesn't understand his own role in the plan. Not just a handful of Muslim countries, either-- I mean, the entire Muslim world.

President Bannon's dream of war is rooted in some incredibly fucked up beliefs verging on the occult. RWNJs like BoscoX aren't even close to being on his level of insane... Bosco is an idiot, but Bannon is dangerous. Sure, Bush started a war because he wanted the oil in Iraq-- it's a shitty thing to do, but a war rooted in capitalistic greed will end as soon as the oil is gone or the country is effectively colonized... Bannon seems to see Islam as a threat to civilization and the enemy in some sort of apocalyptic war.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/02/01/spicer-addresses-bannons-views-islam/97361388/

A year ago I would have thought it insane, but this is what happens when insane people end up in power... you have to start taking their insanity seriously. I mean, this has to be the first time the sanity of the most powerful man in the world was a legitimate concern... so exactly how will this shit end?

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
An excellent post. Thanks. However, Bannon does not have the esteem and power enjoyed by Cheney in 2003. In any case, I maintain that the Islamophobic hysteria is manufactured and false propaganda; posters on here are foolishly complicit in the possible negative outcomes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

I really don't think they would send refugees in when they could just use the Internet to convince Muslim Americans to do what they want.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
So how many more of them do you think we need to bring in here, to add to the ones already here

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
So how many more of them do you think we need to bring in here, to add to the ones already here

Honestly, I wouldn't recommend that anyone move to the US for any reason until Trump is out of office.
They can go to Canada... it's a much safer country.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
So how many more of them do you think we need to bring in here, to add to the ones already here

Honestly, I wouldn't recommend that anyone move to the US for any reason until Trump is out of office.
They can go to Canada... it's a much safer country.

Can't argue with that kind of logic

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
Why does President Trump have to be perfect, especially since he doesn't get the embarrassingly fawning coverage that Obama and Hillary got

Did they?
Murdoch and Breitbart seem to have missed that memo.

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

A lot of the 'fawning' was more along the lines of 'Hillary sucks but we're absolutely terrifed of Trump', not 'Hillary is great!'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

A lot of the 'fawning' was more along the lines of 'Hillary sucks but we're absolutely terrifed of Trump', not 'Hillary is great!'.

It's the same tired "fawning" that the media has been doing every day for years and years. Republicans are Hitler, Democrats are going to stop the rise of the oceans, end racism, make everything free, and the Muslims will all love us."

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

A lot of the 'fawning' was more along the lines of 'Hillary sucks but we're absolutely terrifed of Trump', not 'Hillary is great!'.

It's the same tired "fawning" that the media has been doing every day for years and years. Republicans are Hitler, Democrats are going to stop the rise of the oceans, end racism, make everything free, and the Muslims will all love us."

End wars forever, too. Everyone will love each other

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
End wars forever, too. Everyone will love each other

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
An excellent post. Thanks. However, Bannon does not have the esteem and power enjoyed by Cheney in 2003. In any case, I maintain that the Islamophobic hysteria is manufactured and false propaganda; posters on here are foolishly complicit in the possible negative outcomes.

For sure-- they've taken a legitimate concern and muddled it with heaps of ignorance, xenophobia and paranoia until it's much bigger than it is.

On the other hand, terrorism does exist, there is a genuine threat, and it isn't totally inconceivable that they would attempt to send terrorists in as refugees, or that refugees would become radicalized when they see how America treats them. But if ISIS wanted to attack the US, I really don't think they would send refugees in when they could just use the Internet to convince Muslim Americans to do what they want.

As long as Muslims are marginalized in western societies, isolated in their own closed-off communities, there will be a threat. I'm not saying we need to adopt Sharia law, but flexibility and tolerance is a must... along with education and compassion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

A simplistic straw man.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

either
Tolerance and flexibility? Is that what the Muslims were showing during the New Year's sexual assaults in Germany? Their flexibility? Were the Muslims living in Britain showing their tolerance of the people who let them in when they demonstrated against the British military on Armistice Day and deliberately increased their noise level during the two minutes of silence for Britain's war-dead?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

either
Tolerance and flexibility? Is that what the Muslims were showing during the New Year's sexual assaults in Germany? Their flexibility? Were the Muslims living in Britain showing their tolerance of the people who let them in when they demonstrated against the British military on Armistice Day and deliberately increased their noise level during the two minutes of silence for Britain's war-dead?

I don't understand why you are proposing that we should allow extremist Islamists or groups such as IS and AQ to dictate our moral and ethical standards, which is the substance of your position above. To allow these groups to determine our standards of morals and behaviour is to hand them victory on a platter. If we want to oppose and defeat these malignant forces, then the last thing we should so is to allow them to set our moral ethical and behavioural standards.

If we are correct in believing that we have higher moral and ethical standards than terrorist and fundamentalist groups, then the obvious place is display those higher standards is when we stand in opposition to those groups.

That means we set our own standards, and the standards and actions of extremist Islamists and groups such as IS and AQ are actually irrelevant to setting those standards. That means, for a start, emphasising values such as tolerance, flexibility, diversity and respect for international law, the precise opposite of your position.

You really need to think this through and stop your knee jerk reactions - they are self defeating.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

either
Tolerance and flexibility? Is that what the Muslims were showing during the New Year's sexual assaults in Germany? Their flexibility? Were the Muslims living in Britain showing their tolerance of the people who let them in when they demonstrated against the British military on Armistice Day and deliberately increased their noise level during the two minutes of silence for Britain's war-dead?

I don't understand why you are proposing that we should allow extremist Islamists or groups such as IS and AQ to dictate our moral and ethical standards, which is the substance of your position above. To allow these groups to determine our standards of morals and behaviour is to hand them victory on a platter. If we want to oppose and defeat these malignant forces, then the last thing we should so is to allow them to set our moral ethical and behavioural standards.

If we are correct in believing that we have higher moral and ethical standards than terrorist and fundamentalist groups, then the obvious place is display those higher standards is when we stand in opposition to those groups.

That means we set our own standards, and the standards and actions of extremist Islamists and groups such as IS and AQ are actually irrelevant to setting those standards. That means, for a start, emphasising values such as tolerance, flexibility, diversity and respect for international law, the precise opposite of your position.

You really need to think this through and stop your knee jerk reactions - they are self defeating.

And you really need to stop and think about what exactly might happen while we're being tolerant of everyone. Would you suggest to the German women that were assaulted...those that were raped...that ALL the men that participated were Islamic extremists and that the majority of Muslims living amongst these women are
worthy of toleration and that these tolerant Muslims DONT look down on the sexual freedom of Western women?