Is Trump backing off Muslim ban?

[gabosaurus]

Sure seems like it.
When asked if Muslims from Scotland could enter the U.S., Trump said he wouldn't be against it. He only wants to ban those from "terror countries," and even that is not definitive. Trump wouldn't elaborate who the "terror countries" were.
I am guessing if Muslims want to travel to the U.S. from England or France, Trump wouldn't be opposed.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-scotland-muslim-ban-i-dont-want-people-terror-n598956

[jimnyc]

Not backing off. He said that they should look into banning muslims coming into the country, not "banning a religion" as you would have some believe (in another thread). And what I told you was what you're now posting, that he never intended on banning an entire religion, nor a "muslim ban". His talk was of refugees, and yes, Muslim refugees, and whether or not that should be looked into, or stopped for the interim. And like I added, that it was likely about those coming from war torn countries.

I've also said this quite a few times to you, not just that one thread, but you literally don't listen/read and then continue on your merry way believing what your friends tell you. You were corrected and now want to look like you're on top of the news. :rolleyes: No different than the shitheads running around claiming he said he had a problem with Mexicans, when from the very beginning it was about illegals. But since you like the illegals and you guys take advantage of that, you ignore it.

Or are all of these perhaps just comprehension issues?

[gabosaurus]

Based on your answer, I don't think I am the one with the comprehension problems.

[jimnyc]

Based on your answer, I don't think I am the one with the comprehension problems.

You're the nitwit that keeps claiming he said something he didn't say. Or would you like to share with us where he said he would ban an entire religion? Or ban "all muslims" for that fact. You tried this various ways, and I corrected you both times - with the same thing you are now posting and claiming he is backing off. That's why you reply to me so often the way you do, it's clear that you don't read any of the responses or follow any links. I just find it funny that you suddenly believe, and then post about, of which I have already told you about several times. But you hear/see what you want, and it's funny considering I've been through this with you and said the same thing, or is it simply sad? :)

[Gunny]

Sure seems like it.
When asked if Muslims from Scotland could enter the U.S., Trump said he wouldn't be against it. He only wants to ban those from "terror countries," and even that is not definitive. Trump wouldn't elaborate who the "terror countries" were.
I am guessing if Muslims want to travel to the U.S. from England or France, Trump wouldn't be opposed.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-scotland-muslim-ban-i-dont-want-people-terror-n598956

It never was a Muslim ban. Can you ever be honest? It was about vetting Syrians.

[stephanie]

The left/dem never get tired of running on and spreading misinformation to the citizens in the country. it's the only way they can win.

he never said he was going to ban ALL MUSLIMS. good gawd you leftist should be ashamed of yourselves. but we know you aren't because you will be a willing useful tool for a party, who uses just like one and then laughs at you behind your backs.

[darin]

It never was a Muslim ban. Can you ever be honest? It was about vetting Syrians.

Gab lies about who he/she is, Where he/she is, does it surprise anyone Gabs can't argue or debate honestly?

[Abbey Marie]

It must be nice to have 90% of the media on your side. Truth gets distorted, so that Dem views get promoted. Which is exactly why we will be seeing President Clinton in 2017.
:mad:

[fj1200]

Not backing off. He said that they should look into banning muslims coming into the country, not "banning a religion" as you would have some believe (in another thread). And what I told you was what you're now posting, that he never intended on banning an entire religion, nor a "muslim ban". His talk was of refugees, and yes, Muslim refugees, and whether or not that should be looked into, or stopped for the interim. And like I added, that it was likely about those coming from war torn countries.

I've also said this quite a few times to you, not just that one thread, but you literally don't listen/read and then continue on your merry way believing what your friends tell you. You were corrected and now want to look like you're on top of the news. :rolleyes: No different than the shitheads running around claiming he said he had a problem with Mexicans, when from the very beginning it was about illegals. But since you like the illegals and you guys take advantage of that, you ignore it.

Or are all of these perhaps just comprehension issues?


...
"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on,"
...
"I think that we should definitely disallow any Muslims from coming in. Any of them. The reason is simple: we can't identify what their attitude is," said 75-year-old Charlie Marzka of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
...
Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told CNN on Monday that the ban would apply not just to Muslim foreigners looking to immigrate to the U.S., but also to Muslims looking to visit the U.S. as tourists.
"Everyone," Lewandowski said when asked if the ban would also apply to Muslim tourists.
...
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/

Did I miss the part about refugees too?

[Kathianne]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/

Did I miss the part about refugees too?

Pretty much how I remembered the initial Trump statements and his surrogates seconding. Pretty quickly though they walked it back in typical fashion. I do think many of his supporters do listen more to the walk backs than those not supporting. I know I expect the walk backs and do roll my eyes to myself. Yet, I do 'hear' them. As usual he did walk back and often would go back to the original while speaking to crowds that really, really want the first version. Of course, would be followed by reiteration of the walk backs in other venues.

If he were elected I'm really unsure which way he'd really go. At heart I think he's quite far left of his walk backs. I don't know how much being 'liked' though would come into play. He does seem obsessed by polls.

[revelarts]

Pretty much how I remembered the initial Trump statements and his surrogates seconding. Pretty quickly though they walked it back in typical fashion. I do think many of his supporters do listen more to the walk backs than those not supporting. I know I expect the walk backs and do roll my eyes to myself. Yet, I do 'hear' them. As usual he did walk back and often would go back to the original while speaking to crowds that really, really want the first version. Of course, would be followed by reiteration of the walk backs in other venues.

If he were elected I'm really unsure which way he'd really go. At heart I think he's quite far left of his walk backs. I don't know how much being 'liked' though would come into play. He does seem obsessed by polls.
:clap::clap::clap:

[revelarts]

...
"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on,"
...
"I think that we should definitely disallow any Muslims from coming in. Any of them. The reason is simple: we can't identify what their attitude is," said 75-year-old Charlie Marzka of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
...
Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told CNN on Monday that the ban would apply not just to Muslim foreigners looking to immigrate to the U.S., but also to Muslims looking to visit the U.S. as tourists.
"Everyone," Lewandowski said when asked if the ban would also apply to Muslim tourists.
...


http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/ (http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/)

Did I miss the part about refugees too?


FJ you should not quote facts and news reports you found and copied and pasted from the internet.
Can't you think for yourself?! HUH?!
Just write your opinion will ya please?!
This isn't a real debate or something with a moderator and timer ...and evidence to back up what you say...etc...

[Gunny]

FJ you should not quote facts and news reports you found and copied and pasted from the internet.
Can't you think for yourself?! HUH?!
Just write your opinion will ya please?!
This isn't a real debate or something with a moderator and timer ...and evidence to back up what you say...etc...

And you say you aren't left wing? You misconstrued everything I posted. He's already got an argument, Einstein. You have none.

[Gunny]

Ill tell you what revelarts ....

There's a one on one debate section on this board. Let's go. No cut n paste. Just you vs me. I'll find another mod to do the moderating.

I already have the advantage because I can be wrong. You obviously don't read everything but crap you can quote off the net. You can't be wrong even when you're wrong.

Or, we can go to the Steel Cage and you can say what you want whenever you figure out how to directly confront me. Either way, you're derailing a thread with your whining. Stick to what's being discussed. This board isn't about me and you and your lack of literary skills. Other people want to post too, and they don't want to listen to bickering. You got 3 choices. Pick one.

[Black Diamond]

FJ you should not quote facts and news reports you found and copied and pasted from the internet.
Can't you think for yourself?! HUH?!
Just write your opinion will ya please?!
This isn't a real debate or something with a moderator and timer ...and evidence to back up what you say...etc...
Fine. Go back to your Tolstoy novels with 15 videos encrypted between each paragraph if you're going to cry about it this long. The suggestion was for your benefit as much as anyone else's. I'm a mile past giving a flying fuck.

[Gunny]

Fine. Go back to your Tolstoy novels with 15 videos encrypted between each paragraph if you're going to cry about it this long. The suggestion was for your benefit as much as anyone else's. I'm a mile past giving a flying fuck.

My point is THIS: You want to personally attack me? Use the right forum. We got places for all this kind of crap. But regular users tend to shy out of the mix. I don't want someone run off because of a pissing contest. Anyone that doesn't agree with me doesn't have to. I don't care. Put it in the right place. Derailing a thread over a pissing contest is dumb. Not to be confused with thread progression.

I'm not going to moderate this thread since I am personally involved. I'll get someone else to. The last few posts don't belong in it and have nothing to do with the thread title.

[Black Diamond]

My point is THIS: You want to personally attack me? Use the right forum. We got places for all this kind of crap. But regular users tend to shy out of the mix. I don't want someone run off because of a pissing contest. Anyone that doesn't agree with me doesn't have to. I don't care. Put it in the right place. Derailing a thread over a pissing contest is dumb. Not to be confused with thread progression.

I'm not going to moderate this thread since I am personally involved. I'll get someone else to. The last few posts don't belong in it and have nothing to do with the thread title.
Yeah several of us recommended he be more concise. I took it as attacking several folks including me. These one on one debates... Does everyone get to watch?

[Gunny]

Yeah several of us recommended he be more concise. I took it as attacking several folks including me. These one on one debates... Does everyone get to watch?

Don't get me wrong. I don't pick on rev. I don't want him to leave either. It's just my opinion if he wants to bicker, the middle of someone else's thread isn't the proper forum. And I'm BIG on proper forum. I don't care who protests what, but do it in the right place. When he and I get into it it's because I ain't reading any novels in tiny-ass little font. He is free to do what he wants. But be prepared to accept the consequences of what you do. I have as much right to say what I want as he does.

It doesn't have to be personal.

[Kathianne]

My recommendation right now as opposed to continuing this here, go to other forums. If anyone doesn't wish to read what someone else has written, whether due to content or just the way it's posted, don't. Easy, move on. OTOH, if going to respond, just makes more sense to me to at least read and respond to content. That's me.

I think Rev makes some very good points on some topics, some I agree with, some not so much. He is consistent though throughout. I have no problem discerning his opinion.

[revelarts]

Ill tell you what @revelarts (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1760) ....

There's a one on one debate section on this board. Let's go. No cut n paste. Just you vs me. I'll find another mod to do the moderating.

I already have the advantage because I can be wrong. You obviously don't read everything but crap you can quote off the net. You can't be wrong even when you're wrong.

Or, we can go to the Steel Cage and you can say what you want whenever you figure out how to directly confront me. Either way, you're derailing a thread with your whining. Stick to what's being discussed. This board isn't about me and you and your lack of literary skills. Other people want to post too, and they don't want to listen to bickering. You got 3 choices. Pick one.

We've done the one on one thing already.
seems you declared yourself the winner.. or at least you declared me the loser there.

as far as derailing this thread i made one post, but there have been about 3 or 4 in response from you alone and a few from others as well.

But the last long post i had was in a thread i I created and you and others derailed it by talking about.. what ... not the content of the long post, but lame comments about me and complaints about reading long post.

but hey i made my point.
It just makes sense to post evidence that back up your points or reasserts reality.
And if the people continue to make FALSE or incomplete statement then it's make sense to present MORE evidence to refute it . Even if the facts don't change minds at least the facts have been presented and reality isn't warped by partisan opinions.

[Gunny]

We've done the one on one already.
seems you declared yourself the winner.. or at least declared me the loser there.

as far as derailing this thread i made one post there have been about 3 or 4 in response from you alone and a few from others as well.

But the last long post i had was in a thread i I created and you and others derailed it by talking about.. what ... not the content of the thread but lame comments about me an long post.

but hey i made my point.
It just makes sense to post evidence that back up you point, or reasserts reality.
And if the people continue to make FALSE or incomplete statement then it's make sense to present MORE evidence to refute it . Even if the facts don't change minds at least the facts have been presented and reality isn't warped by partisan opinions.

Read up and post on the topic. It's not about me.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Trump does not have to back off the damn leftist/socialist lies his enemies told.
He said what he said and he was dead on target--and maybe even far too soft about it IMHO.
MYSELF, I THINK WE SHOULD BAN ALL MUSLIMS FLYING UNTIL THIS WAR IS OVER..
AFTER ALL, ITS THEIR DAMN CULT/RELIGION FUELING THE WAR..
Make no mistake Islam runs this war against every non-muslim in the world--thats the truth they and their allies spend billions trying to keep from being realized by the ignorant/blinded masses until its tooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooo damn late!

Why dont you damn morons wake the hell up???????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????--Tyr

[revelarts]

Back on topic.

Trump said one thing THEN. "ALL Muslims". "until we can figure this thing out"
NOW he's saying muslims from "known terrorist" countries.

Supporters seem to find a spot between any 2 statements of his they like and camp there as if that's what he REALLY means.
sorry no one can tell what he really means. There's no public record on which way he'll leap if elected.
Assuming the best is not a wise way to make choice. That's what the left did with Obama.

But one thing to note about all of Trump's statement on Banning Muslims, it's that it's still religion based.

.."It is about terrorism and not about religion. It is about Muslims from countries that support terrorism,"...


but i wonder if his rich Saudi and Dubai friends can make it though the BAN? (BinLaden was Rich too BTW)
Both countries have supported terrorism in the past.
Somehow i suspect he'll have caveats for them not getting "vetting" or before we "figure this out" .

[Black Diamond]

Back on topic.

Trump said one thing THEN. "ALL Muslims". "until we can figure this thing out"
NOW he's saying muslims from "known terrorist" countries.

Supporters seem to find a spot between any 2 statements of his they like and camp there as if that's what he REALLY means.
sorry no one can tell what he really means. There's no public record on which way he'll leap if elected.
Assuming the best is not a wise way to make choice. That's what the left did with Obama.

But one thing to note about all of Trump's statement on Banning Muslims, it's that it's still religion based.

.."It is about terrorism and not about religion. It is about Muslims from countries that support terrorism,"...


but i wonder if his rich Saudi and Dubai friends can make it though the BAN? (BinLaden was Rich too BTW)
Both countries have supported terrorism in the past.
Somehow i suspect he'll have caveats for them not getting "vetting" or before we "figure this out" .
Saudi Arabia has always been given a pass. Why weren't they included in Bush's axis of evil, for example.

[Gunny]

Back on topic.

Trump said one thing THEN. "ALL Muslims". "until we can figure this thing out"
NOW he's saying muslims from "known terrorist" countries.

Supporters seem to find a spot between any 2 statements of his they like and camp there as if that's what he REALLY means.
sorry no one can tell what he really means. There's no public record on which way he'll leap if elected.
Assuming the best is not a wise way to make choice. That's what the left did with Obama.

But one thing to note about all of Trump's statement on Banning Muslims, it's that it's still religion based.

.."It is about terrorism and not about religion. It is about Muslims from countries that support terrorism,"...


but i wonder if his rich Saudi and Dubai friends can make it though the BAN? (BinLaden was Rich too BTW)
Both countries have supported terrorism in the past.
Somehow i suspect he'll have caveats for them not getting "vetting" or before we "figure this out" .

You have to use some common sense. Where do extremist Muslims come from? They don't come form Guatemala. You DO have to address the obvious.

Do you realize that your type mentality (and this is NOT personal) allowed the Third Reich to grow? Pretend it's not there. How many lives did THAT cost before anyone actually acted?

[Gunny]

Saudi Arabia has always been given a pass. Why weren't they included in Bush's axis of evil, for example.

The Saudi's are as bad as the Shia. ISIS is a splinter group of Sunni Islam. So is AQ. So we are fighting against ISI which is a Sunni group based out of SA, and supporting the Shia who hate us. Yest politically. we're buds with SA and the enemy of Iran.

Brilliant strategy. :rolleyes:

I don't care what anyone says. Islam is like fireants in my back yard. You keep killing them and they keep coming back.

[Elessar]

And you say you aren't left wing? You misconstrued everything I posted. He's already got an argument, Einstein. You have none.

He was simply repeating what you and I said on another thread in a sarcastic manner.

[Elessar]

I see Trumps recent statements as more of a clarification than anything else, plain and simple,
to ease people's minds.

[Black Diamond]

I see Trumps recent statements as more of a clarification than anything else, plain and simple,
to ease people's minds.

I liked it that he didn't mince words there and went straight for the jugular.

[Gunny]

He was simply repeating what you and I said on another thread in a sarcastic manner.


I see Trumps recent statements as more of a clarification than anything else, plain and simple,
to ease people's minds.

I'm not a Trump supporter and I don't listen to him. I am a strategist that knows what the price of the end game is.

What I DON'T like is people making crap up. If I went after Trump it would be for who and what he is, and proven to be. Twisting words don't sell with me. The left and the MSM are a bunch of propagandists. The truth doesn't matter to them. I don't play that game. They make up more crap than just using the truth.

But if the left used the truth, they wouldn't have any candidates.