Slashdot Mirror
Donald Trump Obliquely Backs a Federal Database To Track Muslims
HughPickens.com writes: Philip Bump reports at the Washington Post that Donald Trump confirmed to NBC on Thursday evening that he supports a database to track Muslims in the United States. The database of Muslims arose after an interview Yahoo News's Hunter Walker conducted with Trump earlier this week, during which he asked the Republican front-runner to weigh in on the current debate over refugees from Syria. "We're going to have to do things that we never did before," Trump told Walker. "Some people are going to be upset about it, but I think that now everybody is feeling that security is going to rule." When pressed on whether these measures might include tracking Muslim Americans in a database or noting their religious affiliations on identification cards, Trump would not go into detail — but did not reject the options. Trump's reply? "We're going to have to — we're going to have to look at a lot of things very closely," he said. "We're going to have to look at the mosques. We're going to have to look very, very carefully." After an event on in Newton, Iowa, on Thursday night, NBC's Vaughn Hillyard pressed the point. "Should there be a database system that tracks Muslims here in this country?," Hillyard asked. "There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases" Trump said. "We should have a lot of systems." Hillyard asked about implementation, including the process of adding people to the system. "Good management procedures," Trump said. Sign people up at mosques, Hillyard asked? "Different places," Trump replied. "You sign them up at different places. But it's all about management."
The cataloging, rounding up, and internment of the Japanese is one of the darkest and frankly most embarrassing chapters in America's history. I can't believe someone is honestly suggesting that we do this again.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/30/...
Clearly there could be the rise of a charismatic egomaniac who preys on the fears and hatred of the conservatives, making groups out to be the scapegoats (Muslims, gays, immigrants... at least it's not Jews this time around). Everything Trump says about these groups are the same things that Goebbels and Hitler were saying about Jews. We are witnessing the rise of the radical fascists Europe had to deal with 80 years ago. How in the hell are people so damn fucking stupid not to learn from history?
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
"Trump would not go into detail — but did not reject the options" apparently Not saying "NO" = "YES"
How would the posters that are upset about this feel about applying this to the
Scientologists ?
Aum Shinrikyo ?
Golden Dawn ?
The KKK ?
Neo Nazis ?
Pegida ?
Republicans ?
Libertarians ?
People that have more money than you do ?
Just how do you feel about freedom of speech ? Woodrow Wilson at Princeton ? The Halloween costume of your choice ? Operation Rescue publicizing abortion practices ?
It seems that a lot of people have remembered the first amendment today and will probably forget about it by next week.
The Power of Nightmares 1: The Rise of the Politics of Fear (BBC-2004)
Does anyone here not believe that every citizen and resident's religious, political, and social associations aren't already sitting in federal databases? This is part of what TIA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., Prism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., and many of the related programs were really created for...
Lately I've been feeling like I'm in a Philip K Dick novel.
Mostly random stuff.
It's time someone asked The Donald what he thinks of systemd.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Nope. You're living in your own little fantasy world, sponsored by Rush Limbaugh. Trump explained how he'd sign Muslims up for the database.
The reason this is a good move is because people like you are so delusional you'll give him a pass because you would sooner blame the media than pull your head out of your ass.
That word "obliquely" - I do not think it means what you think it means.
sPh
http://www.nbcnews.com/politic...
He is explicitly asked should there be a Muslim-tracking database system to which he replies the whole nonsense about "There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases" and "signing up at different places" when asked about signing people up at mosques.
Nobody is putting words in his mouth.
He IS an idiot that does not think or listen to other people and talks in thought-terminating cliches but he clearly understood those questions and replied to them in his poorly thought through manner.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I couldn't help but notice that you didn't address the comments by Ted Cruz and the fact that multiple candidates attended a "kill the gays" conference. This would imply that you're well aware of these facts, and wanted to draw attention away from them by focusing on another part of my post. Assuming that's the case, I'm asking you now to put aside the partisan vitriol and just stop to think about that for a moment. Those facts alone are fucked up. Really, really fucked up. Something has gone very wrong in this country, and it scares the hell out of me. I want to believe that you care about our nation as much as I do, and I want to believe that you can put aside past loyalties for the good of your country. This isn't a game, and it doesn't get any more serious than this. The right has taken a very dark turn, and we need people on the right to have the courage to pull us back before things go too far.
Gamertag: WyleType
In fact, Christian minorities have a number of special rights under the law, including representation in the parliament. Exactly what kind of country are we trying to become?
Nope. You're living in your own little fantasy world, sponsored by Rush Limbaugh. Trump explained how he'd sign Muslims up for the database.
I don't like Trump (really, I don't like any of the candidates, but......), but as far as I can tell, he didn't say he'd sign Muslims up for a database. He carefully worded his way around it, continually returning to building a wall (so useful that will be~ ), and generally avoided the reporter's question. Here is the actual transcript, you can judge for yourself. I'm giving my understanding of it, he was careful to avoid saying he would sign Muslims up for a database (and even more avoided how he would accomplish it, "management"):
Hillyard: Should there be a database or system that tracks Muslims in this country?
Trump: There should be a lot of systems. Beyond databases. I mean, we should have a lot of systems. And today you can do it. But right now we have to have a border, we have to have strength, we have to have a wall, and we cannot let what’s happening in this country happen any longer.
Hillyard: But that’s something your White House would want to implement?
Trump: Oh, I would certainly implement that. Absolutely.
Hillyard: What do you think the effect of that—how would that work?
Trump: It would stop people from coming in illegally. We have to stop people from coming in to our country illegally.
Hillyard: But specifically, how do you actually get them registered into a database?
Trump: It would be just good management. What you have to do is good management procedures. And we can do that. [to someone else] That’s nice.
Hillyard: Do you go to mosques and sign people up?
Trump: Different places. You sign ’em up at different, but it’s all about management. Our country has no management.
Hillyard: Would they have to legally be in this database, would they be—
Trump: They have to—they have to be. Let me just tell you: People can come to the country, but they have to come legally. Thank you very much.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
There's going to have to be a law patterned after Godwin's about systemd.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
I came here to see how many people would be flipping their shit over the idea. I watched the video, and to my disappointment discovered that Trump didn't suggest anything about said Moslim Database, it was the Reporter shoving it down his throat. And if you listen to the conversation, it seems like the Reporter and Trump are talking about two completely different things!
Come on, ppl!
It's occurred to me that there is some cognitive dissonance going on:
When articles come up about H1B visas, it seems that a majority complain that it should be limited because they believe the evil tech. and software corporations just want more H1Bs so they can fire US born workers and replace them with cheaper workers.
But when the kind of people being considered to allow into the country are Mexicans who have nothing of value in Mexico so try (and do) come into the USA illegally, or random refugees, migrants, etc. from some extremely poor and/or war-torn nation, then it is considered racist to propose any sort of restrictions on their entry.
WTF?
Let's just apply the same standards from now on to all potential immigrants: If you object to letting in an arbitrary number of H1B visa applicants, you are a racist!
The problem is that the whole thing lends itself to "wackadoodles". You have an entire system of belief based on nothing but hearsay, with some ancient goat-herders writing down some oral traditions that have been embellished over generations, and then telling people that this stuff is literal truth. Then people believe this stuff with no evidence for it whatsoever, other than other people reading the same texts and also claiming it's literal truth from God. From there, it's a very small stretch to take some part of that "literal truth" and decide that it really means you need to go murder some people. The Bible after all says that if you have children who disobey you, you're supposed to stone them to death. All these books are full of nonsense like that.
And the "wackadoodles" have been doing this for literally millenia. Christians used to routinely burn people at the stake for being the "wrong" kind of Christian, and interpreting this "word of God" differently.
As long as people believe that some book is the "word of God" then you're never going to get past this stuff. People need to move to actual ethical systems where you can evaluate them based on reason, not superstition.
I watched the video and it seems clear to me he misheard the questions. He never uses the word Muslim himself. the reported just put it out there and it seems clear he thought the question is do we register immigrants.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
According to Thomas Aquinas, whose teachings are highly respected within at least the Catholic church, there are three types of law in the Old Testament: moral, judicial, and ceremonial. The moral laws are permanent, being the ethical foundation of the old and new laws. The judicial laws, though no longer binding, are no sin to follow, as they are built upon the moral laws. The ceremonial laws are forbidden, as to follow them would be to declare the old covenant still binding (this is why Catholics do not keep kosher).
All of the above quotes can be classified as either judicial or moral laws under Aquinas. You can also classify Deuteronomy 13:9 as judicial law - so modern Catholicism would not consider it a serious sin to stone apostates.
I'll let someone else explain the Orthodox or Protestant views on following the Old Testament. I'm even less an expert at those than I am Catholicism.
What do you mean he's advocating for something that congress would never pass? Is he advocating something, or not?
Blaming the media for stupid shit that politicians say is something that every politician would absolutely love. Don't blame the media, blame Trump's lack of comprehension if you want to go easy on him. Blaming somebody other than them lets them off the hook, allows them to be sloppy, and, worse, if he actually meant this, it lets him play both sides of the coin. In that case, it is both red meat for the bigots, and an appeal to the media persecution complex that has so pervaded the Republican party it is now their default.
Blame Trump for his own sloppiness, or, like Ben Carson, they'll be intentionally sloppy and then play it off later.
> And the "wackadoodles" have been doing this for literally millenia.
You are suffering from confirmation bias. It isn't the religion part that makes people do horrible things - Khmer Rouge, Stalin and Mao are all examples of secularist committing mind-numbing atrocities.
Furthermore there are an overwhelming number of counter-examples, of religionists doing immense amounts of good in the world.
The problem is the "wackadoodle" part and they will always be attracted to power structures religious or otherwise. To focus on religion is to miss the point that the problem is human nature and as long as we are human that's what we have to keep focus on.
Furthermore there are an overwhelming number of counter-examples, of religionists doing immense amounts of good in the world.
You are suffering from confirmation bias. It isn't the religion part that makes people do good things. There's countless irreligious people in the Peace Corps.
As for Stalin, Mao, etc., those were basically like religions too, just without the supernatural part. They had the components of a wacky ideology, near-worship of a cultist leader, witch hunts for "unbelievers", etc.
Give people some "holy book" (whether it's the Bible or Mao's little red book) to justify themselves and they'll do all kinds of horrible things.