Donald Trump and the Spike in Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes in the U.S.

a reply to: TechniXcality

Then you should examine your rhetoric. Liberals this, Muslims that... whine, piss, moan.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

By that same token, what about the incidents that have gone unreported or lost in the shuffle due to bad record keeping?

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: daaskapital

Fair enough, I think we are seeing escalation on both sides, however there are underlying issues that aren't being addressed, and because of that we will continue to see the rise of far right nationalism and far left authoritarianism. And you are right it's not just happening in the U.S it's happening throughout the west, interesting times.

I agree. There are definitely situations contributing to the rise in political extremism on both sides. The rise in far-left politics has me concerned, but i'm also worried about the far-right as well. I'm hoping problems don't continue to widen.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: TechniXcality

You're going to deny that you hate Liberals and Muslims?

I've learned here that you're labeled a hater just because you may only disagree. No gray areas here on ATS.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It simply shows a correlation, that is all, but one that appears to have not existed to such a degree before the increase in anti-Muslim rhetoric.

or before the increase in Islamic terror attacks.

Islamic extremism happens frequently, and has for quite a while. US Presidential elections don't; therefore the spike in anti-Muslim violence seems to correlate to this election cycle and the rhetoric therein.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Geezes, they got to get in, first of all!

How are you going to prescreen them before setting foot on US soil?

Besides, it doesn't cover ILLEGALS, for heaven's sake!

Geezes, why don't you people ever look these things up before making claims?

Truth: Undocumented immigrants DO have legal rights under the U.S. Constitution and federal statute. As far back as 1896, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that: “The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens.

You can be a non-citizen and legal in the USA and be covered.

True

You stop giving out visas from certain countries and/or certain passports.

Yeah well, detaining and deporting them with a speedy due process, is not torture. lol.

a reply to: Liquesence

I never saw that thread, but thanks for posting it here. Though these actions are obvious to anyone paying attention. When you socially allow bigotry, even implicitly, acts of bigotry will rise. It's simple cause and effect. The fact that Trump supporters refuse to acknowledge this is rather disturbing.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: C8H10N4O2
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Temporary ban until a better vetting system can be put into place.

Irrelevant! It still completely and 100% violates not only the spirit of freedom of religion but also the actual 1st Amendment.

Do you really put the non-existent rights of non US citizens before the rights and lively hood of US citizens???

Do you really put fears over rationality and the principles this country was founded on? Do me a favor and look up the total number of people killed in terrorist attacks since 9/11 in the United States. I doubt you will though.

Furthermore, why should Muslims be admitted anyway? Does the US have a guarantee of admittance to any particular religion? Nationality?

Yes. The 1st Amendment...

What he is proposing is 100% constitutional, and again is backed by the majority of voting US citizens.

You failed Social Studies didn't you?

You don't seem to understand the constitution very well. It applies to US citizens only. Walking into this country does not make you a citizen.

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: eriktheawful

I know the US has done a lot of horrible things in the past, but we generaly do not repeat those blunders primarily by ruling such things unconstitutional.

I am not worried that if Trump actually became elected that he could follow through on banning a faith. It wouldn't happen because we already have the 14th amendment.


But, there a lot of stupid people that believe it will happen and they vote.

And some of them believe that they can run around committing assault because all the Muslims will be deported.

It's mexicans, the mexicans will be deported. Get it straight.

No idea what surprises he has in store for the muslims.

a reply to: Kali74

You have no clue, who I am.

I'm not whining, I don't hate liberals or Muslims, I do have problems with their ideologies, in which I take time to understand more so with Muslims, liberals in this day in age have failed us, and are a far cry from their 1960 righteous past. So yes, I will stand up against your ideology, but no I won't hurt or hate a liberal, in fact many of my friends are liberals and Muslims, and I discuss things with them peacefully as it should be done in a free marketplace of ideas,but with people like you, who accuse and label haters and bigots Ect, there is no compromise. Anyway Kali, I have liked your posts in previous years but it's election time and I suppose we are all getting worked up with that said have a nice day.

originally posted by: James1982

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: C8H10N4O2
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Temporary ban until a better vetting system can be put into place.

Irrelevant! It still completely and 100% violates not only the spirit of freedom of religion but also the actual 1st Amendment.

Do you really put the non-existent rights of non US citizens before the rights and lively hood of US citizens???

Do you really put fears over rationality and the principles this country was founded on? Do me a favor and look up the total number of people killed in terrorist attacks since 9/11 in the United States. I doubt you will though.

Furthermore, why should Muslims be admitted anyway? Does the US have a guarantee of admittance to any particular religion? Nationality?

Yes. The 1st Amendment...

What he is proposing is 100% constitutional, and again is backed by the majority of voting US citizens.

You failed Social Studies didn't you?

You don't seem to understand the constitution very well. It applies to US citizens only. Walking into this country does not make you a citizen.

No you don't understand the constitution very well. I've already proven this statement false, but here you go again.
Source

First, the U.S. Supreme Court, in 2008, issued a highly publicized opinion, in Boumediene v. Bush, which, by itself, makes clear how false is the claim that the Constitution applies only to Americans. The Boumediene Court held that it was unconstitutional for the Military Commissions Act to deny habeas corpus rights to Guantanamo detainees, none of whom was an American citizen (indeed, the detainees were all foreign nationals outside of the U.S.). If the Constitution applied only to U.S. citizens, that decision would obviously be impossible. What’s more, although the decision was 5-4, none of the 9 Justices — and, indeed, not even the Bush administration — argued that the Constitution applies only to American citizens. That is such an inane, false, discredited proposition that no responsible person would ever make that claim.
ADVERTISING

What divided the Boumediene Court was the question of whether foreigners held by the U.S. military outside of the U.S. (as opposed to inside the U.S.) enjoy Constitutional protections. They debated how Guantanamo should be viewed in that regard (as foreign soil or something else). But not even the 4 dissenting judges believed — as Susan Collins and other claim — that Constitutional rights only extend to Americans. To the contrary, Justice Scalia, in his scathing dissent, approvingly quoted Justice Jackson in conceding that foreigners detained inside the U.S. are protected by the Constitution (emphasis added):

Justice Jackson then elaborated on the historical scope of the writ:

“The alien, to whom the United States has been traditionally hospitable, has been accorded a generous and ascending scale of rights as he increases his identity with our society . . . .

“But, in extending constitutional protections beyond the citizenry, the Court has been at pains to point out that it was the alien’s presence within its territorial jurisdiction that gave the Judiciary power to act.” Id., at 770–771.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Wow, that's quite a compliment!
Thanks!

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: eriktheawful

I know the US has done a lot of horrible things in the past, but we generaly do not repeat those blunders primarily by ruling such things unconstitutional.

I am not worried that if Trump actually became elected that he could follow through on banning a faith. It wouldn't happen because we already have the 14th amendment.


But, there a lot of stupid people that believe it will happen and they vote.

And some of them believe that they can run around committing assault because all the Muslims will be deported.

It's mexicans, the mexicans will be deported. Get it straight.

No idea what surprises he has in store for the muslims.

Thanks for the example.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: UnBreakable

Thus Christians AREN'T in danger from Muslims in those countries, thus the fears towards them in those countries are unfounded.

Christians AREN't in danger from MUSLIMS in those countries? Who tortures, persecutes, and kills them, the Scientologists?

Correct. Christians aren't in danger from Muslims in the United States and 1st world Europe. The numbers bare this out, if you'd bother to check them instead of relying on baseless rhetoric.

I never said Christians were in danger from Muslims in the US and 1st world Europe. I listed the 10 Muslim countries where they are in danger. I was showing how these Muslim countries are just as bad and unaccepting as you are saying the US is. I know this threw you off your agenda and script.

a reply to: UnBreakable

Just because you take disagreement from others as hate doesn't mean I do. I generally don't except where warranted, like with blanket statements for example.

originally posted by: UnBreakable
...guys with pretzel logic like yours...

It's because I live in Philadelphia.

originally posted by: Junkheap

originally posted by: UnBreakable
...guys with pretzel logic like yours...

It's because I live in Philadelphia.

I live near Philly too. I have cheese steak logic.

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: eriktheawful

I know the US has done a lot of horrible things in the past, but we generaly do not repeat those blunders primarily by ruling such things unconstitutional.

I am not worried that if Trump actually became elected that he could follow through on banning a faith. It wouldn't happen because we already have the 14th amendment.


But, there a lot of stupid people that believe it will happen and they vote.

And some of them believe that they can run around committing assault because all the Muslims will be deported.

It's mexicans, the mexicans will be deported. Get it straight.

No idea what surprises he has in store for the muslims.

Thanks for the example.

Oh and he got the nom about 20 mins ago.

So, fun times ahead!

a reply to: UnBreakable

So? What does that have to do with anything? I'm talking about this country, and possibly as an extension 1st world Europe. After all Trump is running for President of the United States, not Iraq or Syria.

Like I've said earlier, even moderate muslims aren't welcome there. Pointing out the dangers of those countries is like pointing out that the sky is blue. Everyone who isn't ISIS is in danger of being killed there. So blaming Muslims for ISIS is intellectually dishonest and bigoted.

a reply to: TechniXcality

... with a gigantic dose of hypocrisy.