• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

American politics

scaramanga said:
You said that people from the banned countries haven't been bombing Americans. The suggestion being that we don't need to worry about their militancy.

So if that's the case, banning them won't cost any lives, as they're not dangerous.

Sent from my SM-G925F using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...

What militancy are we talking about? I thought you just said they haven't bored America? So what militancy are we discussing?
 
thfcsteff said:
What militancy are we talking about? I thought you just said they haven't bored America? So what militancy are we discussing?
Click to expand...
You're the one that said banning these countries was dangerous, not me!

Either these countries don't have dangerous Jihadis, in which case banning them is safe. Or they do, in which case banning them is justifiable.

You can't have both.
 
scaramanga said:
It really is by far the most dangerous religion (currently).

It's explained far better in this interview than I ever could:
http://www.salon.com/2015/11/25/harris_and_illing_correspondence/


I think countries that already have Godtards as citizens are stuck with having to use education.


I would, but they'd be way down the list.
Click to expand...

I don't see Islam being any more dangerous than Christianity has been, is or will be. All serve the same function as part of shock, warfare mind-control as a means to an end.
How would you deal with the "Godtards" ACTUALLY IN CONTROL such as Pence, Bannon and the like?
 
glorygloryeze said:
I don't see Islam being any more dangerous than Christianity has been, is or will be.
Click to expand...
I think Harris disputes that at length in that interview. He makes a very clear case as to why Islam is both more dangerous and less compatible with a civilised society.

glorygloryeze said:
All serve the same function as part of shock, warfare mind-control as a means to an end.
Click to expand...
But only one is likely to kill people for being gay, or changing religion, etc. Only one has suicide bombers. Only one causes groups with major sway to state their aim as the destruction of western civilisation or an entire neighbouring country.

Some fudging awful things have been done and are being done in the name of Christianity, but currently there's no comparison.

glorygloryeze said:
How would you deal with the "Godtards" ACTUALLY IN CONTROL such as Pence, Bannon and the like?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't vote for them. If I were an American I'd probably hop on my mobility scooter and fudge off to Canada right now.
 
Last edited:
Oh, and Trump will almost certainly be able to uphold the ban once it gets to the SC.

According to 8 USC 1182 (section f):
(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President


Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.
Click to expand...
Which essentially means that the President can do whatever the fudge he wants in terms of blocking entry into the US.

The court case that's been brought is unlikely to get any traction outside of California. The suggestion is that by doing this the president is discriminating on visa application based on country of origin, but that's unlikely to win because the people under the travel ban are not even getting the chance to apply for visas, they're being blocked before that stage.
 
scaramanga said:
I think Harris disputes that at length in that interview. He makes a very clear case as to why Islam is both more dangerous and less compatible with a civilised society.


But only one is likely to kill people for being gay, or changing religion, etc. Only one has suicide bombers. Only one causes groups with major sway to state their aim as the destruction of western civilisation or an entire neighbouring country.

Some fudging awful things have been done and are being done in the name of Christianity, but currently there's no comparison.


I wouldn't vote for them. If I were an American I'd probably hop on my mobility scooter and fudge off to Canada right now.
Click to expand...


All depends on perspective and who gets to paint the news and facts really. CNN, BBC, Fox News always have a large advantage for Christendom in that they are the loudest mouthpieces to tell certain tales about war around the world from a 'western' perspective. They don't tend to tell the full story and tactics that "Christian" military powers inflict for PR reasons obviously (though they did show the "Allied" soldiers praying with their deacon on the eve of invading Iraq, which was quite interesting in its subtlety of being able to show how the crusades were back in town).

Suicide bombings have formed part of warfare tactics for years: from Kamikaze, to the German Luftwafe who went on "self-sacrifice" missions in WW2 to present day Jihadists. As long as there is some kind of drawn out conflict there will at some point be such methods. Godtards on all sides usually have stated aims of destroying the other civilisation because they don't like "the other Godtard's GHod". Again, i don't see people who want to wage war and have Islam as their religion are any worse than the rest in that regard. Oh and lots in the bible-belt would kill people for being gay too.

And also if that is real worry why hasn't Trump banned those from Saudi Arabia, where one of the worst Jihadist are said to come from anyhow?
 
scaramanga said:
I think Harris disputes that at length in that interview. He makes a very clear case as to why Islam is both more dangerous and less compatible with a civilised society.


But only one is likely to kill people for being gay, or changing religion, etc. Only one has suicide bombers. Only one causes groups with major sway to state their aim as the destruction of western civilisation or an entire neighbouring country.

Some fudging awful things have been done and are being done in the name of Christianity, but currently there's no comparison.


I wouldn't vote for them. If I were an American I'd probably hop on my mobility scooter and fudge off to Canada right now.
Click to expand...


On that logic, maybe the Donald should get busy exiling the gun toting fundies.
 
glorygloryeze said:
And also if that is real worry why hasn't Trump banned those from Saudi Arabia, where one of the worst Jihadist are said to come from anyhow?
Click to expand...

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States president.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back