Trump proven right once again, FBI Chief, Can't investigate Muslims

Once again Trump has been proven right... not only does this give credence to the whistleblower I post a thread about Hillary's State Dept. Blocked Investigation into Orlando Killer's Mosque.



Now, more information coming from NYC FBi Chief.

Former FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom, who headed the FBI’s New York City office, said on The Kelly File on Thursday that FBI agents are “petrified” of being fired apparently because of White House orders that say the bureau cannot investigate “anything to do with Muslims” in the traditional way the bureau would pursue criminals or potential criminals and terrorists.

Unbelievable.

PC culture has to and will end.

Do not vote for Hillary Clinton or this idiotic behavior will continue. Get Obama and these other totally corrupt Dem's out of office immediately. We need strong leadership who enforces the law not stops it from being enforced. Obama is a moron.

Some of you just don't accept the truth, even if it came up to you and smacked you right in the jaw knocking your teeth out.

a reply to: onequestion

Translation: DHS whistleblower could have stopped shooting if we'd let DHS strip Americans of their rights when investigating Americans.

a reply to: onequestion

I agree, I sat In a thread arguing with another member about the massive security failure that took place, and all this guy wanted to talk about was wether the Orlando shooter was gay. Anyway nice thread OQ

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think and it's just my personal opinion, but I think the Orlando shooter was an Islamic terrorist before an American citizen, I hope one day you can find the courage to say that.

a reply to: TechniXcality
Whatever your personal opinion on the matter, if the OP were true we'd be stripping Americans of their rights to due process while hunting down Muslims like the shooter in Orlando. Sure we may be able to stop another Omar, but at what cost? Why are you ok with stripping American's of their rights when it isn't you? I have a compromise. How about we strip Muslims of their due process rights if we can strip you of your 2nd Amendment rights?

PS: Your post is an ad hominem.

a reply to: TechniXcality

There's no doubt about that. After he claimed himself as an Islamic soldier, he said he was shooting people because America was bombing Syria. It's evident from his own statements that he was anti-American, and first and foremost, an Islamic terrorist who pledged allegiance to ISIS.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

When being attacked in war by an enemy who refuses to wear a uniform, we do not discuss their "due process" rights, they are lucky we haven't started rounding them up and putting them in camps (which I don't support and never would) but if this was thirty years ago with such attacks, radicals and mosques that were known to preach radical rhetoric yea they'd be in some camp until we stopped getting attacked.

a reply to: TechniXcality
Well newsflash. We aren't at war with the Muslim religion. Also, it's nice to see you have reasoning for stripping Americans of their rights. It's always funny how you conservatives are always going on about how the left is all totalitarian this, stripping freedoms that. But when you righties get just a LITTLE scared y'all suddenly start yelling about infringing on freedoms. Hey question, what was the partisan slant of the administration that put the PATRIOT Act into effect?

Well I guess I'm going to continue to push to have your 2nd Amendment right stripped. I of course will be pushing to keep mine, because I'm not so terrified of outlier statistics to the point that I want to compromise my freedoms to fight it. But if you want to strip rights from others, you don't deserve your own rights.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You my friend are living in a very bubbly world, we are absolutely at war with a large sect of Islam who espouses death for the kafir and the apostates.

Krazysh0t! An enemy combatant has no such rights!!

a reply to: TechniXcality

I'm living in the USA. I've met and interacted with tons of Muslims over my lifetime. Not a SINGLE one of them has even hinted at being aggressive to me, let alone threatened my life. How about you? Did you have to dodge landmines in the road this morning on your way to work like I used to have to do in Iraq? No? Then stop being so damn scared of a religion!

I've served in the military over in Iraq as well. THERE I can understand more extreme measures, but you are seriously deluded if you think that Muslim terrorism is a threat to the American way of life. It's just a political talking point to strip Americans of their rights, and you are falling for it hook, line, and sinker. Good job being a stooge for the ongoing loss of our freedoms.

I'm really starting to understand what's going on here.

The FBI is backing Trump so it's revealing what's going on with Clinton and Obama after they've stopped the FBI from doing it's job for the last 8 years.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TechniXcality
Well newsflash. We aren't at war with the Muslim religion. Also, it's nice to see you have reasoning for stripping Americans of their rights. It's always funny how you conservatives are always going on about how the left is all totalitarian this, stripping freedoms that. But when you righties get just a LITTLE scared y'all suddenly start yelling about infringing on freedoms. Hey question, what was the partisan slant of the administration that put the PATRIOT Act into effect?

Well I guess I'm going to continue to push to have your 2nd Amendment right stripped. I of course will be pushing to keep mine, because I'm not so terrified of outlier statistics to the point that I want to compromise my freedoms to fight it. But if you want to strip rights from others, you don't deserve your own rights.

Not to mention all the draconian legislation that's been implemented over the past fifteen years (by both D's and R's) has done... exactly what to thwart terrorism again?

Ah but I digress, the "small-government," clowns will ensure that EVEN MORE legislation against the Consitution and rights of "we the people," is going to somehow magically make us all safer (although it's the very entity of government that poses the greatest threat with their constant meddling in foreign affairs; arming, funding, and training "rebel," groups that eventually become our enemy and "radical terrorists." Pay attention, folks).

All these people screaming about "gun control," and how it's strictly a "left," thing - then when Trump goes on about "no-fly, no-gun," these very same people consider it "common sense."

It's absolutely amazing, but considering Trump is a Democrat loving long-time family friend of the Clintons, I'm not surprised by any means.

Well put. Those who wish to piss over and erode the rights of others make no coherent or logical sense when it comes to how "theirs," are under attack.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If that is so arguably both of us are falling for the partisan rhetoric, and I never knew you were a battle buddy what was your MOS? I disagree though of course, because we are talking about enemy combatants here, and if you hold these certain beliefs which I am more than willing to spell out for you, then you are an enemy of America.

a reply to: TechniXcality
13M. MLRS Crewmember.

Like I said, there are no enemy combatants here. Just lone nuts piggy backing off of America's fears to propel their individual brand of terrorism to new heights. Here check this out:
American Mosques Are Actually A Great Deterrent Against Violent Extremism

For more than six years after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, this secretive police spying program targeted New York and New Jersey Muslims solely because of their faith.

Officers in the New York City Police Department’s Demographics Unit infiltrated Muslim student groups, eavesdropped on conversations between Muslims, spied on Muslim-owned businesses, recorded the sermons of imams, catalogued Muslims who Americanized their surnames, and placed informants and undercover officers inside mosques.

But after the program was exposed in a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation by The Associated Press, an NYPD officer was forced to admit that all that spying had been for naught.

In a sworn deposition submitted to the court as part of a lawsuit, the chief of the NYPD Intelligence Division, Lt. Paul Galati, conceded that the mass NYPD surveillance of Muslims had yielded exactly zero leads into criminal or terrorist activity.

That’s right: zero leads.

And while the Demographics Unit has since been disbanded amid multiple lawsuits challenging its constitutionality, the effects of the NYPD spying program linger.

A 2012 CUNY Law School report, “Mapping Muslims: NYPD Spying And Its Impact On American Muslims,” found that “surveillance of Muslims’ quotidian activities has created a pervasive climate of fear and suspicion, encroaching upon every aspect of individual and community life.”

“Surveillance has chilled constitutionally protected rights—curtailing religious practice, censoring speech and stunting political organizing,” the report said. The surveillance also “severed the trust that should exist between the police department and the communities it is charged with protecting.”

Surveilling a group of people based on their religion is always a bad idea, says David Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center On Terrorism And Homeland Security at Duke University.

“First, it’s almost certainly unconstitutional,” Schanzer said. “Second of all, it’s a big waste of time. That’s what the NYPD found. If you have limited resources, and you surveil people without any sort of evidence that they’re likely to engage in crime, then you’re spending a huge amount of resources surveilling the innocent. It’s a big waste of time and money.”

“The third reason it’s problematic: If people feel like they are being pursued and surveilled by the government and they’ve done nothing wrong, you’re going to destroy the kind of trust you need to combat extremism. Communities that are fearful of government backlash, of religious-based discrimination, are going to be fearful of cooperation and of coming forward with knowledge that they might have about a suspicious individual.”

a reply to: TechniXcality

Krazysh0t! An enemy combatant has no such rights!

Of course they do. Every human has the same basic rights.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Unless you're a Muslim.

a reply to: onequestion

Isnt this what people have been suspecting: that the government is actively preventing investigations or telling various individuals to stand down.

Wasnt this also the case with regards to the Ft. Hood shooter?

In all of these cases, it seems like govt has advance knowledge, knowing that these individuals are potentially dangerous and or that something is going to happen.

Plausible deniability.

Govt cant be accused of helping these people. The most they can be accused of is "standing down", "political correctness" or "being incompetent".

The next question being, "why would govt (or elements within govt) allow this to happen?"

Anyone's guess. Pushing of agendas? More spying, take away guns, fewer rights in general?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You mean like the due process the left wants to rob from gun owners with no fly no buy?

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You mean like the due process the left wants to rob from gun owners with no fly no buy?

Pretty much the same thing actually. I don't stand for that measure either. The no fly list is too porous and flawed to be a good indicator if we should strip someone of their right to own a gun.

a reply to: buster2010

Somebody trying to kill you, has the right to a 50cent solution.