White House: Donald Trump Muslim plan 'disqualifies' him from presidency

[KarenBravo]

I am absolutely not prepared to be kicked out of Thailand based upon someones xenophobic or bigoted opinion anymore than I am prepared to have Muslims kicked out of the United States or barred from entry based only on a religion or a fear. You people are so scared it is amazing. I am afraid if Hitler was still in power in Germany many of you would run and cower in fear. If the greatest generation- my father and your grandfather talked like you are talking today- both America and Europe would be speaking only German and Japanese. I am listening to the bellowing of cowards and fools.

Actually, we'd be speaking Russian...

[Thaidream]

Thailand has no limits on the number of people who can obtain retirement or marriage Visas. They do as other countries also do have criteria that applies to everyone across the board. If everyone meets the criteria everyone comes in and gets their Visa. Even Muslims. What you are advocating is establishing criteria based upon a person's religion because you are afraid of that religion. Completely wrong and noting you can say will ever make it right. Morality is never up for grabs. It is always constant and cannot be changed.

[ray simmons]

I hope not!!

[KarenBravo]

Thailand has no limits on the number of people who can obtain retirement or marriage Visas. They do as other countries also do have criteria that applies to everyone across the board. If everyone meets the criteria everyone comes in and gets their Visa. Even Muslims. What you are advocating is establishing criteria based upon a person's religion because you are afraid of that religion. Completely wrong and noting you can say will ever make it right. Morality is never up for grabs. It is always constant and cannot be changed.

I disagree. Morality changes through the ages.

1000 years ago, slavery was practiced everywhere and was not considered wrong.

50 years ago, homosexuality was pretty much universally condemned.

During the dark ages and medeaval times it was acceptable to rape, pillage and then slaughter the inhabitants of any town that was won by force of arms.

Morality is fluid. Always has been and always will be and differs from culture to culture and religion to religion.

Edited December 9, 2015 by KarenBravo

[dutchisaan]

good idea

http://m.arabianbusiness.com/dubai-retail-giant-suspends-sales-of-trump-products-amid-muslim-ban-furore-614696.html#.VmgGjLiLSUl

when he wins the election do it with the country, see how that feels like

I'm glad you put this up in the thread. Because it proves once again that Donald Trump is the ONLY candidate for president willing to sacrifice personal wealth and profits for the well being of the nation. This makes him the only patriot in the room. All the rest are owned by Superpacs and the donor class. Trump is his own man, and he has repeatedly put good public policy AHEAD of his own profits. Just as your link shows

Ofcourse your hero Trump will put up his own wealth. That's not a problem for him.

His just files for bankrupcy again. All he has to do is use his old forms and just change the date.

[NeverSure]

"Earnest noted first that every president must take an oath to "preserve, protect and defend" the U.S. Constitution, and thus, he said, Trump would not qualify."

And, just what part of the US Constitution guarantees that foreigners of any stripe will be allowed into the country, Mr. "White House"?

It's the part called the First Amendment...

It begins... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..." For some reason, people always seem to forget that second clause...

This is not about letting in "foreigners of any stripe", its about the fact that it is wrong to exclude people purely on the basis of the color of one particular stripe. You know... things like gender, age, race, RELIGION...

-snip-

You and those who "liked" your post are so wrong. The US constitution applies only to US citizens. It contains guarantees for citizens.

You know damned well that the US can refuse entry to any foreigner it chooses at the whim of an immigration officer, much less the POTUS.

Class dismissed.

[sanukjim]

Unless The United States Supreme Court declares otherwise The White House statements carry opinion only.

[NeverSure]

The Us Constitution is a living document- it covers everyone, every where because it is based upon a philosophy that does not discriminate based upon race. color, creed, national origin , sexual preference or age. There is no way to exclude people because they are deemed to be of a certain religion. What are you people so afraid of? Listening to the posters on TV- I am amazed at the fear emanating from you. The terrorists love you all because you are succumbing to the fear they are spreading. Do you think that only Muslim terrorists exist in the World. A white Anglo Saxon American bombed a federal building in Oklahoma City and killed hundreds. Another American drove his airplane into the IRS Building in Austin Texas. A crazed man killed young children in a school not that long ago. The facts are that Muslim terrorists pose a small danger to America. I am more afraid of the number of mentally ill people who have access to guns than any Muslim.

The US Constitution "covers everyone, everywhere?" Don't thinks so. Pretty sure it doesn't. And yes a US president has the right to exclude an entire class of people based upon their being a threat to the US, just as Jimmy Carter did to Iranians in 1980.

People on here seem to think the US is obligated to let just anyone waltz into the country and walk about. They seem to think that the Constitution gives people that right. That is just simply not the case.

No matter your race or religion, if you aren't an American you'd have a hard time becoming a resident in the country already. If you're from certain countries including Thailand, you might well not even be able to get a tourist visa.

I want to bring a nice lady school teacher from Isaan to the US for 30 days to show her the US. I want to travel all over and show her the most well known places from the Grand Canyon to NYC.

It's not going to happen no matter how much money I have or that she has a master's degree, a long time teaching career, owns her own home and car, and would want to get back to where her family including parents are.

PEOPLE. Please stop acting as if you think that there's a right for any foreigner to enter the US or that immigration doesn't have full latitude to decide. Immigration works for the POTUS using laws designed by Congress and they can do as they wish with the borders.

Cheers.

[mpa]

191,924 signatures till now to ban Trump from UK

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/114003

[Linky]

The Us Constitution is a living document- it covers everyone, every where because it is based upon a philosophy that does not discriminate based upon race. color, creed, national origin , sexual preference or age. There is no way to exclude people because they are deemed to be of a certain religion. What are you people so afraid of? Listening to the posters on TV- I am amazed at the fear emanating from you. The terrorists love you all because you are succumbing to the fear they are spreading. Do you think that only Muslim terrorists exist in the World. A white Anglo Saxon American bombed a federal building in Oklahoma City and killed hundreds. Another American drove his airplane into the IRS Building in Austin Texas. A crazed man killed young children in a school not that long ago. The facts are that Muslim terrorists pose a small danger to America. I am more afraid of the number of mentally ill people who have access to guns than any Muslim.

The US Constitution "covers everyone, everywhere?" Don't thinks so. Pretty sure it doesn't. And yes a US president has the right to exclude an entire class of people based upon their being a threat to the US, just as Jimmy Carter did to Iranians in 1980.

People on here seem to think the US is obligated to let just anyone waltz into the country and walk about. They seem to think that the Constitution gives people that right. That is just simply not the case.

No matter your race or religion, if you aren't an American you'd have a hard time becoming a resident in the country already. If you're from certain countries including Thailand, you might well not even be able to get a tourist visa.

I want to bring a nice lady school teacher from Isaan to the US for 30 days to show her the US. I want to travel all over and show her the most well known places from the Grand Canyon to NYC.

It's not going to happen no matter how much money I have or that she has a master's degree, a long time teaching career, owns her own home and car, and would want to get back to where her family including parents are.

PEOPLE. Please stop acting as if you think that there's a right for any foreigner to enter the US or that immigration doesn't have full latitude to decide. Immigration works for the POTUS using laws designed by Congress and they can do as they wish with the borders.

Cheers.

I dont think this is about who is and isnt allowed in. Its about making a law that says you cannot be admitted due to religion.

Its about the person making the law, and he is a citizen and cannot make such a law.

[Usernames]

191,924 signatures till now to ban Trump from UK

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/114003

How many to condemn the San Bernardino terrorist attack? BTW, it's a good thing to see these people sign that petition. Now, we know who is a threat and who to keep out of the US.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Usernames

[NeverSure]

Why would anyone want to go to the UK unless he's a Muslim looking for a council flat? Trump has enough of his own skyscrapers he doesn't want a coal-smudged flat in London.

Edited December 9, 2015 by NeverSure

[Linky]

Why would anyone want to go to the UK unless he's a Muslim looking for a council flat? Trump has enough of his own skyscrapers he doesn't want a coal-smudged flat in London.

He owns a golf course there, perhaps he would like a game.

Quite funny, like children. You arent allowed to go. Well i dont want to go anyway. Naa na na naaa na.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Linky

[Lampang2]

Who is exactly the white house?

A talking house?

[mpa]

In the UK there are laws against hate speech and have denied entry to people preaching hate speech.

Irrespective of his wealth and fame, he has spouted tripe and requires denial of entry into the UK.

The hate speech law in the UK revolves around incitement. People have been banned due to hate speech for using passages of the Quran to incite hatred (extremist Islamic preachers make up approximately 50 percent of the list) .

People have also been banned from entry for using the Bible as incitement (most prominently The Westboro Baptist Church).

Edited December 9, 2015 by mpa

[chuckd]

It begins... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..." For some reason, people always seem to forget that second clause...

This is not about letting in "foreigners of any stripe", its about the fact that it is wrong to exclude people purely on the basis of the color of one particular stripe. You know... things like gender, age, race, RELIGION...

Now permit me to address a tiny part of your post. You make this claim...

"It's the part called the First Amendment...

It begins... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..." For some reason, people always seem to forget that second clause...

To put it rather bluntly, you are incorrect.

Trump is talking about keeping Muslim immigrants out of the country.

The Bill of Rights has no bearing outside the USA other than US citizens. It only applies to those immigrants actually resident in the US. Not to any potential legal resident.

Immigration rules can be set to any criteria the federal government desires. If they only want to give visas to red headed people (natural red heads of course) they can do so.

Only left handed people will be accepted on odd days in the month of February? Yep, perfectly acceptable and constitutional.

Anyway, none of this is going to happen...at least until 20 January 2017

Congress can not pass laws, ANY laws, including IMMIGRATION laws, that would violate the first amendment.

If they enacted a law that said Muslims (or Chinese, or Latino, or women, or people over 65) are not allowed to get a visa, that law would be unconstitutional.

You are talking out your ass.

Now, why did you have to go and get nasty?

Having said that, permit me to provide you with a tad bit of information which you are desperately in need of.

Article I, section 8, clause 4 says...

The Congress shall have power "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization..."

For example, Congress passed a law against Chinese immigration in 1882 banning any Chinese citizen from legally entering the US. This law was repealed in 1943. For approximately 61 years, Chinese citizens were not issued visas.

There was also a law against lunatics, disease carriers and illiterates at one time. It is believed this was aimed at the British and European immigrants.

In short, if Congress passes a law that is signed by the President, that is the end of the story. If Congress says no Muslims and Obama signs it (Yeah, I know...snowball-hell and all that), then it is the law of the land.

You keep coming back to the Establishment Clause, Article 1 of the Bill of Rights.

If those Muslims that are in country legally wish to worship Allah, they may do so freely. However, if those same Muslims believe the Establishment Clause protects them in London or Belgium, they are sadly mistaken. The Establishment Clause is only for US consumption and if Congress says no Muslims shall be issued visas, they will have to practice their religious freedoms elsewhere.

I hope this is clear enough for you and your fans. Believe me, if I am wrong there are a number of posters that will delight in proving me incorrect.

Until they weigh in, you might want to put the shovel down and stop digging that hole.

[lostboy]

The Us constitution covers all Americans everywhere, and residents of the United States, Countries can limit who comes into their country. There was a time when Chinese were excluded from the United States. However, it has been proven through the years that these policies are discriminatory and it is impossible to exclude people based upon religion. It would be challenged in court and never affirmed. America's current immigration policy is quite fair. Those people from countries that have unfetered terorism are not going to have an easy time coming into America. It is Europe that has the problem. Too many refugees in a limited space. If you are a citizen or resident of a country and you go abroad to fight against that very country, you have forfeited your citizenship and residency. Laws can and will be amended. This is a far cry from brandishing all Muslims as terrorists or putting people in concentration camps. This is madness people and can only lead to disaster.

The US Constitution does NOT cover Americans while they are in other countries. Those countries' laws and constitutions do. If you are operating under the assumption that the US Constitution protects you while you're in Thailand, you are soon to be in for a big surprise.

Laws enacted under the framework of the US Constitution apply to US Citizens no matter their location in the same way that laws of other countries apply to their nationals. In particular, US taxation law, laws on foreign corrupt practices for individuals and corporations and laws on human trafficking and child sexual abuse most certainly apply to US citizens abroad. In fact the zeal for the application of US laws extends to military bases where Status of Forces Agreements often allow primacy of US law over local laws as some rape victims in Japan and Korea have discovered.

Of course, this is entirely irrelevant. The Trump fanboys whose mental state is easily swayed by superficiality and glamour are merely diverting the issue to a meaningless legal point to stop people from discussing the real and underlying horror and hideousness of what Trump has blurted through his pie hole this time. Where next does he and his growing army of crazies proceed in terms of the 'Muslim Problem'. Do you think the final solution that these nuts come up with will be any less inhuman than what earlier generation of white, scared, xenophobes have come up with?

Oh well, I really feel for these blowhards who will be suffering huge depression when they finally realise that the majority of the people who actually matter know what this moron's feet are made from.

[lostboy]

A country has the right to protect its borders, however, the protection must be based upon rational thinking and long term national interest/ How would you all feel if Thailand decided that it is changing its Visa policy and limit the number of Westerners granted retirement and marriage Visas. They use the rationale that the Western lifestyle is subverting Thai culture and they need to limit the numbers to avoid any further contamination. Would you support this? What you are advocating is very similar to this.

If Thailand did such a thing, it would be entirely up to them to do so. I wouldn't have any say at all in the matter. Although the comparison you make is an erroneous one. Trump is talking about banning muslims from entering the US, which is within the president's and congress' legal authority, not about kicking out people already resident, which is what you're saying Thailand might do. But again if Thailand wants that, it's their choice. And I hope that all of us who are here are prepared for such an eventuality. It could happen. I know I'm prepared. How about you, Thaidream?

Those of us who do not require the regular and temporary permissions to extend their non-immigrant, immigrant status have protections under Thai law. Our status, earned by justifying what we have contributed and will contribute to the country, is not easily removed.

For those people who are clearly here to exploit the country and its citizens, their presence or absence is entirely meaningless to the people who count. Take what you will and depart when you will. It's just a pity we have to suffer the noise they make while residing here. Eugene Birdick and William Lederer's 1958 book no longer applies just to US officials.

Edited December 9, 2015 by lostboy

[MrTee]

191,924 signatures till now to ban Trump from UK

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/114003

How many to condemn the San Bernardino terrorist attack? BTW, it's a good thing to see these people sign that petition. Now, we know who is a threat and who to keep out of the US.

"How many to condemn the San Bernardino terrorist attack?" do you mean how many British people? Probably about 64 million..

If you mean amongst Muslims. just this week there were mass protests by muslims against Daesh staged in many countries across the world. - lemme guess - you missed that.

In India 70,000 Muslim clerics issued fatwas against terrorism. This is openly supported by at least 1.5 million Muslims.

How many people came out and marched over the 94% of non-muslim terrorists attacks in the US?

Can you link me to one single post were you are apologising, or even condemning, for the vast majority of terrorists attacks in the US committed by non-muslims?

Donald Trump is supporting the Daesh agenda, and for that alone he deserve to be disqualified from standing for any office.

[Opl]

Anyway ..... according to the Jérusalem Post " Republican US Presidential candidate and real estate mogul Donald Trump is strongly considering a visit to the Temple Mount when he comes to Israel for the first time at the end of the month."

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Zionist-Union-MK-calls-Trump-racist-adds-hes-not-welcome-to-Knesset-436769

[lostboy]

A country has the right to protect its borders, however, the protection must be based upon rational thinking and long term national interest/ How would you all feel if Thailand decided that it is changing its Visa policy and limit the number of Westerners granted retirement and marriage Visas. They use the rationale that the Western lifestyle is subverting Thai culture and they need to limit the numbers to avoid any further contamination. Would you support this? What you are advocating is very similar to this.

Maybe you haven`t noticed, but Thailand already limits the numbers of Westerners granted retirement and marriage Visas. We have to fulfill a criteria to stay here. None of us could emerge on Thailand`s shores or borders claiming political asylum. I suggest you try it and see how far you`ll get.

How would the Thais feel if millions of Farlang refugees with possible terrorist links started heading for the country and the neighbouring countries? No contest, no comparison.

The immigration policies of all countries impose requirements that have to be met to be approved. Implementing requirements is not limiting the numbers of a certain group of people allowed to qualify. Since clearly your world view in this country is limited to westerners, perhaps you might not be aware that immigrants of neighbouring countries are able to get work permits and have a defined path to citizenship irrespective of their immigration status. These people number in the hundreds of thousands. But of course this is nothing compared to the handful of pasty faced white old men living in their ghettoes and kidding themselves that they are not immigrants but expats.

It is really illuminating when our less culturally aware bigots start comparing the Thai system with another country. The level of ignorance and lack of understanding is palpable. From the moronic transliteration of Thai words into English characters providing an indication of the class of Thai that they are associated with to the assumptions about Thai policy makers and their motivations and actions.

I look forward to reading the self-published opus on Thai culture that you are no doubt working on.

[naboo]

This thread is a great example of why the American empire is collapsing so spectacularly. The people of America just don't get it.

[lostboy]

Democracy is always a threat to those in charge for the moment.

Are you talking about the US? The US isn't a democracy.

Cheers.

Really? You need a First Amendment and a Bill of Rights. In some European countries, slander/libel are criminal offenses and can incur prison time. (Italy and Sweden, maybe more, but I know these two have that.) In Italy, if the prosecutor doesn't like a not-guilty verdict, they just try the defendant again until they get the guilty verdict they want.

The US has a First Amendment that makes it difficult to sue anybody for defamation, in addition to enshrining freedom of speech, protects the public FROM religion in addition to guaranteeing freedom OF religion. British pundits have said they need a 1st Amendment. There is more. By the way, contrary to Commonwealth people's stereotype, Obama was elected in 2008 from grass-roots small donations raised over the internet (not corporate America).

You shouldn't lecture Americans with education on American democracy. Cheers.

Isn't the US democracy a bit non linear?

Some votes in some states more valuable than others.

Maybe for some county's / districts also.

Complex.

You guys may not be familiar with this trope. There is a certain group of far out, right wing nut jobs i.e. the Trump demographic prophetically labelled by McCain a while ago, who are the 2nd Amendment types, chauvinistic, old men who have lost their power or never had it to begin with who cling to the idea that the US is not a democracy because it is a republic. There is a whole body of knowledge, actually anti-knowledge of pseudo academic interpretations of the Constitution, Federalist Papers and other documents that argues that the already deified Founding Fathers (note the capitalisation) did not what a democracy because the uneducated and poor mob will vote for entitlements for themselves. So these enlightened FF's, inspired of course by Jesus, had the prescience to know of a political structure based on universal suffrage influenced by a welfare mentality that was a direct consequence of the Industrial Revolution and writers like Karl Marx, a hundred years before this happened. These nitwits, and you know who they are on TVF, refuse to accept the generally accepted definitions in all dictionaries that the US is a republican form of democracy.

My own theory is that these fools are indoctrinated so heavily by their ideology that they cannot accept the word democracy because it is similar to the word democrat and that means liberals. It means progressives. It means the end of civilisation. it means Obama. So it unacceptable.

Their foolishness gets boring when displayed in public like on TVF but if you are interested just google and you will see all these nuts pictured in front of US flags, wearing their US flag pins, screaming about the 2nd Amendment and so scared that a black guy is President that they are all running, lemming-like, after Trump. Do buy into the US is not a democracy bs. It just diverts attention and energy away from the need to keep actual fascists out of power.

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

Obama's "White House" lack of a plan disqualifies him but we're stuck with him for another year.

And Bush's lying to his citizens in order to start an illegal war so that Cheney and his halliburton cronies could get even more rich does not disqualify him? How many american lives were lost because of that decision? The lives lost from ISIS killings can also be added to that toll as Bush's policies have paved the way for ISIS to exist.

But no, no it's all Obamas fault. Open your eyes. Place the blame where it belongs.

If I broke glass on the floor and you cut your feet on it because you didn't sweep it all up in time would that mean it is your fault that your feet got cut or mine?

[Basil B]

New twist on this is Trump may be banned from the UK...

A petition calling for Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump to be barred from entering UK has gathered more than 200,000 names, so MPs will have to consider debating the issue.

The petition went on Parliament's e-petition website on Tuesday.

It was posted in response to Mr Trump's call for a temporary halt on Muslims entering the United States.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35052505

The E petition has nearly a quarter of a million signatories so far...

Block Donald J Trump from UK entry

The signatories believe Donald J Trump should be banned from UK entry.

The UK has banned entry to many individuals for hate speech. The same principles should apply to everyone who wishes to enter the UK.

If the United Kingdom is to continue applying the 'unacceptable behaviour' criteria to those who wish to enter its borders, it must be fairly applied to the rich as well as poor, and the weak as well as powerful.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/114003

There is a counter petition "Don't ban Trump from the United Kingdom" but at this time stands under 2,000 signatories that less than 1% of those for...

British citizens and UK residents can create or sign a petition at https://petition.parliament.uk/

P.S.

Signatories from Thailand:

52 for the Ban Trump Petition.

2 for the petition against

Edited December 9, 2015 by Basil B

[arjunadawn]

The Us constitution covers all Americans everywhere, and residents of the United States, Countries can limit who comes into their country. There was a time when Chinese were excluded from the United States. However, it has been proven through the years that these policies are discriminatory and it is impossible to exclude people based upon religion. It would be challenged in court and never affirmed. America's current immigration policy is quite fair. Those people from countries that have unfetered terorism are not going to have an easy time coming into America. It is Europe that has the problem. Too many refugees in a limited space. If you are a citizen or resident of a country and you go abroad to fight against that very country, you have forfeited your citizenship and residency. Laws can and will be amended. This is a far cry from brandishing all Muslims as terrorists or putting people in concentration camps. This is madness people and can only lead to disaster.

The US Constitution does NOT cover Americans while they are in other countries. Those countries' laws and constitutions do. If you are operating under the assumption that the US Constitution protects you while you're in Thailand, you are soon to be in for a big surprise.

Laws enacted under the framework of the US Constitution apply to US Citizens no matter their location in the same way that laws of other countries apply to their nationals. In particular, US taxation law, laws on foreign corrupt practices for individuals and corporations and laws on human trafficking and child sexual abuse most certainly apply to US citizens abroad. In fact the zeal for the application of US laws extends to military bases where Status of Forces Agreements often allow primacy of US law over local laws as some rape victims in Japan and Korea have discovered.

Of course, this is entirely irrelevant. The Trump fanboys whose mental state is easily swayed by superficiality and glamour are merely diverting the issue to a meaningless legal point to stop people from discussing the real and underlying horror and hideousness of what Trump has blurted through his pie hole this time. Where next does he and his growing army of crazies proceed in terms of the 'Muslim Problem'. Do you think the final solution that these nuts come up with will be any less inhuman than what earlier generation of white, scared, xenophobes have come up with?

Oh well, I really feel for these blowhards who will be suffering huge depression when they finally realise that the majority of the people who actually matter know what this moron's feet are made from.

I do not agree with you but it is refreshing to read someone offering a strong argument for their position. I would caution out of fairness that not everyone who supports Trump supports all he says, intends, or even the man himself. Many just oppose the current status quo so vehemently that nothing short of a great plural uprising could turn the tide of the liberal slide into relativism and decay that defines America now; agree or not this is the worldview of Trump's unprecedented rise- the support is engendered by something wrong in the Republic. Trump is, I suspect, the best of a number of bad choices- to many. And yea, many couch their love for him with actual antipathy and hatred for others. This is equally true on the left where toleration is daily defined as toleration for proscribed points of view only- to wit college campuses, the White House, the UN, climate talks, etc. Just like the assertion that one can lead by fiat because of congressional gridlock progressives now universally call for removing from the discourse those with opposing points of view on a number of topics. This is what Trump's popularity reflects- disgust with relativism and social engineering.

Its actually meaningless for the White House to assert what does and does not disqualify one from office in that much of the current state of affairs is directly tied to the executive's leading from behind strategy which seeks to create a bipolar sunni/shia world in the Middle East, the refusal to define islamic jihad which only serves to alienate the larger muslim population in the eyes of the many, the excising of all things "islamic" from Justice Department and Homeland Security documents, the avowed support for the Muslim Brotherhood when in fact the larger of the two primary Egyptian demonstrations was to throw Morisi out, whom the White House asserted was a legitimate leader, ad infinitum. The actions of this executive set up much of the degraded environment that enables islamic jihad, loans it legitimacy, permits it to hold land as a State, and equivocates on "red lines" revealing moral bankruptcy.

The White House has no legitimacy to note disqualifications of presidency. A great number of actions under Obama, under cross examination, could easily rise to probably cause for high crimes and misdemeanor, certainly moral turpitude. 7 years ago opponents imagined a what the the nation would look like following "fundamental transformation;" now we know.

[donnybay]

The chances of Donald Trump becoming President are in the trillions. You have a better chance winning the Thai lottery. His statements however are playing right into the hands of ISIS. They love him!! And those that support him are also playing into the hands of the terrorists. Fear running wild.

He is 6/1 with most UK bookmakers, making him 3rd Fav

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner

Don't write him off too quick

[uptheos]

Donald Trump has caused worldwide consternation after a string of incendiary remarks about Muslims, including in Britain when he said: 'We have places in that are so radicalised that police are afraid for their own lives.' But backing his claims a serving officer said today: 'Trump's not wrong. He pointed out something that is plainly obvious, something which I think we aren't as a nation willing to own up to'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

[Thorgal]

New twist on this is Trump may be banned from the UK...

A petition calling for Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump to be barred from entering UK has gathered more than 200,000 names, so MPs will have to consider debating the issue.

The petition went on Parliament's e-petition website on Tuesday.

It was posted in response to Mr Trump's call for a temporary halt on Muslims entering the United States.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35052505

The E petition has nearly a quarter of a million signatories so far...

Block Donald J Trump from UK entry

The signatories believe Donald J Trump should be banned from UK entry.

The UK has banned entry to many individuals for hate speech. The same principles should apply to everyone who wishes to enter the UK.

If the United Kingdom is to continue applying the 'unacceptable behaviour' criteria to those who wish to enter its borders, it must be fairly applied to the rich as well as poor, and the weak as well as powerful.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/114003

There is a counter petition "Don't ban Trump from the United Kingdom" but at this time stands under 2,000 signatories that less than 1% of those for...

British citizens and UK residents can create or sign a petition at https://petition.parliament.uk/

P.S.

Signatories from Thailand:

52 for the Ban Trump Petition.

2 for the petition against

Apparently, the petition website crashed due to mass voters...

[lostboy]

The Us constitution covers all Americans everywhere, and residents of the United States, Countries can limit who comes into their country. There was a time when Chinese were excluded from the United States. However, it has been proven through the years that these policies are discriminatory and it is impossible to exclude people based upon religion. It would be challenged in court and never affirmed. America's current immigration policy is quite fair. Those people from countries that have unfetered terorism are not going to have an easy time coming into America. It is Europe that has the problem. Too many refugees in a limited space. If you are a citizen or resident of a country and you go abroad to fight against that very country, you have forfeited your citizenship and residency. Laws can and will be amended. This is a far cry from brandishing all Muslims as terrorists or putting people in concentration camps. This is madness people and can only lead to disaster.

The US Constitution does NOT cover Americans while they are in other countries. Those countries' laws and constitutions do. If you are operating under the assumption that the US Constitution protects you while you're in Thailand, you are soon to be in for a big surprise.

Laws enacted under the framework of the US Constitution apply to US Citizens no matter their location in the same way that laws of other countries apply to their nationals. In particular, US taxation law, laws on foreign corrupt practices for individuals and corporations and laws on human trafficking and child sexual abuse most certainly apply to US citizens abroad. In fact the zeal for the application of US laws extends to military bases where Status of Forces Agreements often allow primacy of US law over local laws as some rape victims in Japan and Korea have discovered.

Of course, this is entirely irrelevant. The Trump fanboys whose mental state is easily swayed by superficiality and glamour are merely diverting the issue to a meaningless legal point to stop people from discussing the real and underlying horror and hideousness of what Trump has blurted through his pie hole this time. Where next does he and his growing army of crazies proceed in terms of the 'Muslim Problem'. Do you think the final solution that these nuts come up with will be any less inhuman than what earlier generation of white, scared, xenophobes have come up with?

Oh well, I really feel for these blowhards who will be suffering huge depression when they finally realise that the majority of the people who actually matter know what this moron's feet are made from.

I do not agree with you but it is refreshing to read someone offering a strong argument for their position. I would caution out of fairness that not everyone who supports Trump supports all he says, intends, or even the man himself. Many just oppose the current status quo so vehemently that nothing short of a great plural uprising could turn the tide of the liberal slide into relativism and decay that defines America now; agree or not this is the worldview of Trump's unprecedented rise- the support is engendered by something wrong in the Republic. Trump is, I suspect, the best of a number of bad choices- to many. And yea, many couch their love for him with actual antipathy and hatred for others. This is equally true on the left where toleration is daily defined as toleration for proscribed points of view only- to wit college campuses, the White House, the UN, climate talks, etc. Just like the assertion that one can lead by fiat because of congressional gridlock progressives now universally call for removing from the discourse those with opposing points of view on a number of topics. This is what Trump's popularity reflects- disgust with relativism and social engineering.

Its actually meaningless for the White House to assert what does and does not disqualify one from office in that much of the current state of affairs is directly tied to the executive's leading from behind strategy which seeks to create a bipolar sunni/shia world in the Middle East, the refusal to define islamic jihad which only serves to alienate the larger muslim population in the eyes of the many, the excising of all things "islamic" from Justice Department and Homeland Security documents, the avowed support for the Muslim Brotherhood when in fact the larger of the two primary Egyptian demonstrations was to throw Morisi out, whom the White House asserted was a legitimate leader, ad infinitum. The actions of this executive set up much of the degraded environment that enables islamic jihad, loans it legitimacy, permits it to hold land as a State, and equivocates on "red lines" revealing moral bankruptcy.

The White House has no legitimacy to note disqualifications of presidency. A great number of actions under Obama, under cross examination, could easily rise to probably cause for high crimes and misdemeanor, certainly moral turpitude. 7 years ago opponents imagined a what the the nation would look like following "fundamental transformation;" now we know.

My issue was the silliness of this legalistic spat over the powers to stop Muslims from entering the US. You have responding by arguing the fall of Western civilisation. You also don't endorse Trump but you rationalise the motivations of many of his followers. Rather than take on the whole anti-PC, anti-climate change, clash of civilisations argument, I think the main issue I have with your wide ranging post is the idea that liberalism is leading or has led to the collapse of American society. I vaguely recall some quotations from my Classics lessons and in trying to find the references, I came across http://mentalfloss.com/article/52209/15-historical-complaints-about-young-people-ruining-everything Isn't this what this is all about. Stick in the muds lamenting over everything going to pot. This happens with every generation. Often the triggers are different but the sentiments are the same.

Why is this so? Why can't people face the unknown with confidence? Particularly American and similar western countries. These countries are strong. They have institutions that have met challengers and solved problems. Courts, political processes, government agencies, education programs - all based on the principles of Western Liberal thought as defined by the 18th Century Rationalists and expanded as universal suffrage was adopted until current times.

The Muslim scare. The Illegal Immigrant Scare. The Black Crime Scare. The Home Invasion Scare. All of these fears and anxieties created for what? Perhaps it is a conspiracy by Big Pharma to sell more Xanax or whatever.

In any case, I don't think a defence of Western Liberalism is wanted here. I think the anti-Trump people on TVF just want an outlet to express their rage that this demagogue is enabling a significant demographic in their chauvinism and that history demonstrates that the can be extremely dangerous.

What has been Obama's fundamental transformation? Non Americans laugh at the charges laid against Obama of being a socialist. I do believe that under Obama's watch, the US has taken a sharp and beneficial step to the left. In saner moments, when I can appreciate the core elements of the traditional Republican ideology, I still have always thought that Republicans don't do social justice very well. It is a very harsh ideology. If you can't keep up then you are left behind. Don't complain. It's your own fault. The Baby Boomer generation started a process of liberalism but it is really the Millenials who are taking this to a logical conclusion and demanding that their government deal with social justice issues. Obama has had the fortune and good sense to listen to this and so the US has the Affordable Care Act, marriage equality, decriminalisation of drugs, attention given to the number of people incarcerated etc etc.

I find it interesting that you assume a 'great plural uprising'. I find nothing of any plurality in the demographic that has come under the Trump thrall. It is entirely one dimensional. A nastier bunch of people I have never encountered. Their arrogance, narrow mindedness and selfishness is antithetical to all of my values. What do these people care of the under-class in their corporatist utopia under Trump? What do they care of differing social and cultural views when they have the view that it is "their way or the highway". What thought will they give to the non combatants of countries where they will direct the US Military to impose a self-centred world view on the 'bad' guys. How will they be defining 'bad guys'? I think most of us have some inkling.

I understand perfectly your rationale for why we should understand Trumps attraction. That is not the issue. The issue is a fundamental difference in the way some of us think people should behave to each other and governments should behave towards their citizens.