Muslim woman thrown out of Trump rally; group seeks apology

[Jingthing]

When muslims are the minority they are vitimised. When they they are the majority there will be no other minorities.

That's a gross exaggeration of course but your point has a grain or more of truth in it in a number of Muslim dominated nations. But we're talking about the U.S. where indeed Muslims are a small minority group with no prospects of that changing.

[Jingthing]

Hope she is not holding her breath for a response.

You're right. There will be no apology. The Trump does not apologize.

[sanukjim]

The evidence of disruption was there.....You!!! Rose Hamid!!! ...YOU, purposely went to this rally, with that in mind, as you knew you wouldn't be welcome.

Nice try....

Screw Her and her idea of disruption.( did anyone check her passport or other status ?)

[casualbiker]

It's NOT a judenstar at all. Jews do not have a monopoly on yellow. The six-point judenstar is quite different from the Wal-Mart mass-produced kindergarten card advertising multi-purpose things they have got.

There's an antisemite under every bed, isn't there.

Really? Because they do not know a Star of David from a vesica pisces or a platonic solid is weak intellectual refuge. Of course their intent remains. It is even worse because the underlying intention remains intact but instead of outright co-opting the actual Star of David they would come up with their own, one that is... oh, just a silly ole symbol from a wal mart kit. This argument reinforces the nonsense that the liberal left imbibe in- they drink the cool-aide that informs them if they can announce an argument they will demand the world believe it. My sister, the drama queen, was notorious for this. She would announce an angle to an issue, one that seemed not the best argument but the most opportune, then come hell or high water she found herself arguing such stupid things, and actually believing her arguments.

No matter what the ignorance of these people its self evident that they intended to mimic Jews either for mercenary opportunity or derision; either way, they employed their faith in the service of another symbol for tactical advantage- clearly betraying/finessing even their own symbolic injunctions. I don't mind opponents arguing all day long that I am wrong about the nature of what happened here but to argue the yellow badge is no more than... coincidence... it has nothing at all to do with Jews, etc. forces me to confront a much uglier impression of others on this forum. Digesting even. In fact, this concludes our exchanges with such posters.

The intent is to show exactly what Trump has suggested would happen if he was President.. It's not the Judenstar. Commentators around the world have been using Hitler and the Jews as comparisons.. Because it a Muslim doing it you're getting ya knickers in a twist... Let's face it NO ONE should be forced to wear identification like that in public in our world today!

[Jingthing]

Disrupt what?

The garbage coming out of the typical Trump speech is no loss to anyone.

[Scott]

Inflammatory posts and replies removed.

[Ulic]

It was Trumps party, he decides who the guests are simple.

[Jingthing]

It was Trumps party, he decides who the guests are simple.

Perhaps but if he tells the door, or the border, NO MUSLIMS, you know in your heart he's a fascist.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Jingthing

[thaibeachlovers]

But she was not vilified because she's... "from the muslim faith." If I wear a muslim skullcap and smack a cop am I arrested because I am muslim? No, of course not. Her accouterments are not a protective amulet from truth.

When I have someone over for dinner I have zero obligation to have a free speech area in my home. Say something impolite or steal the day's attention from Dad's wake service and we will kick you out. The abusive contortion you suggest of the 1st Amendment is hilarious. It is. I have zero duty to enable the free speech of others, only not to infringe upon it in the public space. In fact, the Bill or Rights are restrictions on governments primarily. Trump elected to provide a protest area so opponents could sycophantically suck off his media and it is far more than most would do.

Silent protest is protest; she broke the rules. This is a known fact of civil society/civil disobedience from Emerson/Thoreau era. Even here, however, the focus was on government not personalities. "Its obvious the woman is a political activist," yes. For this reason she was told to leave. Its evident from the footage and reports. As the onion layers of radical islam and its multifaceted Civilization Jihad are peeled away we will see the Regressive Left and Islamic Jihad frantically offer all manner of excuses, spin, howls and wailing and gnashing or teeth as they are both revealed for the world to really see- seditious bedfellows.

Perhaps you are right, but this is politics, and If Trump wants to be president, and prove his claim that he would be a GREAT negotiator for as, he needs to display his political skill, and not fall for simple political ploys such as this.

All this "great negotiator" had to say was :

" Now now people leave this lady along, this is America, and we all have the right to out opinion, let her stand and listen to as, and perhaps by the end of this rally we will change her opinion of as"

It would had made him look good, and her look stupid standing there.

"Politics, the art of telling some one to go F%#k them selves in such a way that they say thank you"

Trump is just an Idiot with money, please don't mistake wealth with intelligence

Edit, stupid laptop key-board dropping letters . dont buy an HP envy , a piece of crap for a lot of money

Posts removed for response.

Ah, now this is a different angle. Was there a different way to handle this? Maybe. But if recent management of such persons by Obama and HRC are any indication, Trump should bear no greater burden than they have- they often handle things the same way.

I have primarily said I dislike Trump least but with each passing day this quality of my affection changes. I increasingly like Trump more than the others. Sorry, I suppose I am a "wingnut." Those with interests in the status quo will not let Trump win easily. It is better to maintain the illusion of choice between two wings of the same party- Democrat and Republican. But if Trump does win, it'll be worth the ride. IMO, America is so far to the tipping point that anything is worth a shot to avoid the world Obama and Hillary are giving us.

What is it that you like about Trump, more and more as time goes by?

His inability to deal with simple political ploys such as this?

His unelectability is not a function of the stutus quo, his unelectability is a result of his mouth not communicating with his brain.

Now he is starting with his birther runt toward Cruz. He says born in Canada disqualify him,

Only wingnuts would not know that it is not where you are born, but if one of your parents is a US citizen. Trump knows that, only the wingnuts he is trying to convince to make him president do not. He is a dangerous demagogue and the sooner he exits this race the better.

I agree with the lack of choice between the two parties, bringing in a clown does not enhance the choice.

Claiming that HRC or Obama would. or does ,act similarly is arguable, but even if one was to agree, I don't see how their stupidity would in any way diminish Trump's.

Seems pretty clear to me that he likes Trump because he is NOT Obama or HRC, and would certainly be preferable to a HRC win.

Those who ridicule Trump ignore the fact that the Dem alternative is not a good choice. The front runner is a proven liar and a failure at Sec State.

Given a better candidate Trump would not have lasted a month, but they are all professional politicians, bought and paid for by the likes of Trump. Yes, Carson is also a non politician, but politically speaking he is a dead man walking.

[FritsSikkink]

Hope she is not holding her breath for a response.

You're right. There will be no apology. The Trump does not apologize.

he likes some immigrants though

[samran]

It was Trumps party, he decides who the guests are simple.

Perhaps but if he tells the door, or the border, NO MUSLIMS, you know in your heart he's a fascist.

Strange how the rugged individualists of this forum have absolutely no problems with that...

[thaibeachlovers]

It was Trumps party, he decides who the guests are simple.

Perhaps but if he tells the door, or the border, NO MUSLIMS, you know in your heart he's a fascist.

Strange how the rugged individualists of this forum have absolutely no problems with that...

Changed my mind about replying. This whole thread is degenerating into the usual anti Trumpfest. I hope he wins, just to read the wailing that will be on TV.

Edited January 11, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[Jingthing]

It was Trumps party, he decides who the guests are simple.

Perhaps but if he tells the door, or the border, NO MUSLIMS, you know in your heart he's a fascist.

Strange how the rugged individualists of this forum have absolutely no problems with that...

Changed my mind about replying. This whole thread is degenerating into the usual anti Trumpfest. I hope he wins, just to read the wailing that will be on TV.

Such a patriot!

Anyway, so the USA is flirting with a potential fascist dictator.

Doesn't mean we're gonna marry him!

Kick him to the coib!

Edited January 11, 2016 by Jingthing

[F430murci]

It was Trumps party, he decides who the guests are simple.

Perhaps but if he tells the door, or the border, NO MUSLIMS, you know in your heart he's a fascist.

Strange how the rugged individualists of this forum have absolutely no problems with that...

Changed my mind about replying. This whole thread is degenerating into the usual anti Trumpfest. I hope he wins, just to read the wailing that will be on TV.

Lol, no doubt. So funny how a bunch of people on here living thousands of miles away from the US lose so much sleep over and get so worked up about stuff like this that won't even impact them in their day to day lives. At the end of the day, even our lives in the US will not change or the changes will be so subtle that no one will really notice them regardless as to who is elected President. All of this uproar, fear, anger, paranoia and etc. centers in their minds.

[F430murci]

Perhaps but if he tells the door, or the border, NO MUSLIMS, you know in your heart he's a fascist.

Strange how the rugged individualists of this forum have absolutely no problems with that...

Changed my mind about replying. This whole thread is degenerating into the usual anti Trumpfest. I hope he wins, just to read the wailing that will be on TV.

Such a patriot!

Anyway, so the USA is flirting with a potential fascist dictator.

Doesn't mean we're gonna marry him!

Kick him to the coib!

Back away from the ledge. Paranoia will destroy ya. It will be alright and there is a solution . . . If your worried about the ideology of the US government, don't come to the US. Nothing we do is going to make its way into Thailand and disrupt your daily life. Candidly, nothing Clinton, Trump, Obama, Cruz, Sanders et al. do are going to really change our daily lives here. Obama has done a lot of things I disagree with, but none of those things have changed anything in my day to day life. Sure, my tax dollars may be allocated in a different manner that I might prefer, but I am still going to being paying those tax dollars regardless as to how they get allocated. Other than that, there will be noticeable changes to those of us living here.

Edited January 11, 2016 by F430murci

[Jingthing]

This does impact expats!
We need to learn a lot about Canada.

Where you from?

Oh, Canada, eh.

Where in Canada?

Umm. Detroit?

[samran]

It was Trumps party, he decides who the guests are simple.

Perhaps but if he tells the door, or the border, NO MUSLIMS, you know in your heart he's a fascist.

Strange how the rugged individualists of this forum have absolutely no problems with that...

Changed my mind about replying.

I have that effect on people.

[arjunadawn]

This OP's premise is the apology requested by CAIR CAIR is the facade of islamic jihad/Lawfare Jihad in America

CAIR is not an "advocacy group" (not in the manner this deceitful byline suggests). CAIR is a front group with the express goal of sedition- the overthrow of the United States of America. 1. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism- FBI. 2. CAIR just lost a lawsuit (most points) because an employee exposed CAIR and co wrote a book called "Muslim Mafia." CAIR asserts mercenary motives of the employee should stop book publishing. The courts ruled that such a motive, if true, does not immunize CAIR from the points raised in the book- it is a "Muslim Mafia," (my emphasis). 3. Other nations have recognized and banned CAIR as an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood's Civilization Jihad. 4. CAIR and the MB are uniquely aided and abetted by the Obama administration (this is beyond dispute), to include lifting travel restrictions on MB terrorists et al to enter the US unhindered, appointing Muslim Brotherhood member to the highest levels of Homeland Security.

Paying attention to the invention and development of this issue reveals all one needs to know about the mechanics of the Muslim Mafia in America. They consistently use the power of foreign monies to leverage enemies in protracted court battles to a) silence opposition to their Civilization Jihad, B ) force compliance or capitulation on islamic accommodations, and C) use legal mechanics to force "discovery" of their enemies knowledge/documents. (In fact, this last point was the singular reason CAIR had their arse handed to them in the courts for repeatedly refusing themselves to comply with discovery as they attempted to sue/Lawfare the authors of the book, "Muslim Mafia."

Americans/UK and Europeans had better wake up: CAIR/Muslim Brotherhood are not your friends and are certainly not "advocates" for anything wholesome and American/British/Western/Enlightened/Modern/Liberal. How foolish can one possibly be? These are not "advocacy" groups, not for any end you want your children inheriting. The Muslim Brotherhood is not to Islam what the Illuminati is to the NWO theorists- the Muslim Brotherhood is an overt (and covert) organization with the avowed goal of islamically globalizing the world and restoring the Kaliphah. No secrets here, only self delusion and self dhimmitude.

Understand the network and where CAIR fits into this longstanding seditious plan to overthrow America. It is a bold as it is repulsive.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6176

http://www.clarionproject.org/Muslim_Brotherhood_Explanatory_Memorandum#

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/17/us-group-cair-added-to-terror-list-by-united-arab-emirates.html

http://www.investigativeproject.org/1854/doj-cairs-unindicted-co-conspirator-status-legit#

http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/122.pdf

Edited January 11, 2016 by arjunadawn

[Jingthing]

I'm not a CAIR fan either. But Trump has really gone too far with the scapegoating. This doesn't need to be pure black and white. Rational profiling yes. Harmful scapegoating no.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Jingthing

[lostboy]

This OP's premise is the apology requested by CAIR CAIR is the facade of islamic jihad/Lawfare Jihad in America

CAIR is not an "advocacy group" (not in the manner this deceitful byline suggests). CAIR is a front group with the express goal of sedition- the overthrow of the United States of America. 1. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism- FBI. 2. CAIR just lost a lawsuit (most points) because an employee exposed CAIR and co wrote a book called "Muslim Mafia." CAIR asserts mercenary motives of the employee should stop book publishing. The courts ruled that such a motive, if true, does not immunize CAIR from the points raised in the book- it is a "Muslim Mafia," (my emphasis). 3. Other nations have recognized and banned CAIR as an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood's Civilization Jihad. 4. CAIR and the MB are uniquely aided and abetted by the Obama administration (this is beyond dispute), to include lifting travel restrictions on MB terrorists et al to enter the US unhindered, appointing Muslim Brotherhood member to the highest levels of Homeland Security.

Paying attention to the invention and development of this issue reveals all one needs to know about the mechanics of the Muslim Mafia in America. They consistently use the power of foreign monies to leverage enemies in protracted court battles to a) silence opposition to their Civilization Jihad, B ) force compliance or capitulation on islamic accommodations, and C) use legal mechanics to force "discovery" of their enemies knowledge/documents. (In fact, this last point was the singular reason CAIR had their arse handed to them in the courts for repeatedly refusing themselves to comply with discovery as they attempted to sue/Lawfare the authors of the book, "Muslim Mafia."

Americans/UK and Europeans had better wake up: CAIR/Muslim Brotherhood are not your friends and are certainly not "advocates" for anything wholesome and American/British/Western/Enlightened/Modern/Liberal. How foolish can one possibly be? These are not "advocacy" groups, not for any end you want your children inheriting. The Muslim Brotherhood is not to Islam what the Illuminati is to the NWO theorists- the Muslim Brotherhood is an overt (and covert) organization with the avowed goal of islamically globalizing the world and restoring the Kaliphah. No secrets here, only self delusion and self dhimmitude.

Understand the network and where CAIR fits into this longstanding seditious plan to overthrow America. It is a bold as it is repulsive.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6176

http://www.clarionproject.org/Muslim_Brotherhood_Explanatory_Memorandum#

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/17/us-group-cair-added-to-terror-list-by-united-arab-emirates.html

http://www.investigativeproject.org/1854/doj-cairs-unindicted-co-conspirator-status-legit#

http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/122.pdf

By legal definition, what you have said is hate speech. Incomprehensibly hypocritical from someone who just a few days ago alleged that only the Left uses illogical, fallacious and emotional language against their political foes. You long list of websites does not include http://www.anti-cair-net.org Why not? Is that too obviously a nexus of recognisable hate speech.

1. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism. Clearly you have no evidence except slander otherwise they would be indicted. CAIR is an entity which is not responsible for the actions of individual members or associates, only for what the governing body does in its name. You should either present evidence of the involvement of CAIR in terrorism or withdraw the slander.

2. CAIR tried to suppress a 'tell all' book by a disgruntled former associate and lost the court case. The fact that CAIR was not successful in suppressing the book does not immediately validate the entire contents of that book. The attempt of suppression is no different from other organisations that want to manage their brand and the fact that they lost is a victory for the courts and free speech in America. However you use this as a vindication of the term Muslim Mafia. What does this mean? Well clearly you are making implications but with no substance. Perhaps you might provide the definition of Muslim Mafia used by the author of the said book so that people can determine the context for such incendiary speech?

3. Which nations have banned CAIR and for what reason under what laws? Do you mean Israel? Why should anyone just take what you are saying at face value?

4. Neither CAIR or the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt has been classified as a terrorist organisation by anyone apart from Ted Cruz and his sort of 'people'. Why should there be travel restrictions? Why should not the US administration be in dialogue with the muslim brotherhood? It is called diplomacy. They did, after all, win an election in Egypt. So we come once more to your tautology. I say CAIR is a terrorist organisation. Consequently Obama supports terrorism because he engaged with CAIR etc etc.

You construct elaborate arguments based on what you call self evidentiary positions and regard anything contrary to this as fallacious. Muslims are citizens of the United States. They have the same protections as all other citizens. They may organise advocacy groups. They may engage in political speech and political protest. They may even bear arms if they pass the background checks. People involved in hate speech against any group attempt to de-legitimize such groups as a way to strip them of lawful protections. There is nothing new about this. However, counter-intuitively, history has demonstrated that positive outcomes can be derived from allowing dissent, from engaging with opponents and antagonists in productive ways and demonstrating respect to all persons. Your way leads to conflict, I am afraid. People who engage in hate speech, generally out of fear, end up producing the outcomes which they fear the most. It seems it doesn't matter how highly educated a person is or how articulate they are in their expression, if they have no intrinsic respect for others, then their analysis and conclusions will always be flawed.

[Broeno]

You better call a hippo for an apology then this warmongering idiot.

[Linky]

She stood up to protest and disrupt the meeting. She was led out. Nobody touched her. What does she want an apology for? Wonder what would happen if I went to an Obama townhall and just silently stood there every time somebody said something I didn't like? Do you think CNN would have let me or anybody else do that a few nights ago??? Or would I/we have been led out by force?

'Wonder what would happen if I showed up in "silent protest" at a mosque...

Precisely which of this woman's "rights" were violated?

Why the relevance to a mosque, was she potesting in a church?

But if you feel the need to attend a mosque and protest against trump im sure nothing will happen to you.

[Linky]

But she was not vilified because she's... "from the muslim faith." If I wear a muslim skullcap and smack a cop am I arrested because I am muslim? No, of course not. Her accouterments are not a protective amulet from truth.

When I have someone over for dinner I have zero obligation to have a free speech area in my home. Say something impolite or steal the day's attention from Dad's wake service and we will kick you out. The abusive contortion you suggest of the 1st Amendment is hilarious. It is. I have zero duty to enable the free speech of others, only not to infringe upon it in the public space. In fact, the Bill or Rights are restrictions on governments primarily. Trump elected to provide a protest area so opponents could sycophantically suck off his media and it is far more than most would do.

Silent protest is protest; she broke the rules. This is a known fact of civil society/civil disobedience from Emerson/Thoreau era. Even here, however, the focus was on government not personalities. "Its obvious the woman is a political activist," yes. For this reason she was told to leave. Its evident from the footage and reports. As the onion layers of radical islam and its multifaceted Civilization Jihad are peeled away we will see the Regressive Left and Islamic Jihad frantically offer all manner of excuses, spin, howls and wailing and gnashing or teeth as they are both revealed for the world to really see- seditious bedfellows.

Perhaps you are right, but this is politics, and If Trump wants to be president, and prove his claim that he would be a GREAT negotiator for as, he needs to display his political skill, and not fall for simple political ploys such as this.

All this "great negotiator" had to say was :

" Now now people leave this lady along, this is America, and we all have the right to out opinion, let her stand and listen to as, and perhaps by the end of this rally we will change her opinion of as"

It would had made him look good, and her look stupid standing there.

"Politics, the art of telling some one to go F%#k them selves in such a way that they say thank you"

Trump is just an Idiot with money, please don't mistake wealth with intelligence

Edit, stupid laptop key-board dropping letters . dont buy an HP envy , a piece of crap for a lot of money

Posts removed for response.

Ah, now this is a different angle. Was there a different way to handle this? Maybe. But if recent management of such persons by Obama and HRC are any indication, Trump should bear no greater burden than they have- they often handle things the same way.

I have primarily said I dislike Trump least but with each passing day this quality of my affection changes. I increasingly like Trump more than the others. Sorry, I suppose I am a "wingnut." Those with interests in the status quo will not let Trump win easily. It is better to maintain the illusion of choice between two wings of the same party- Democrat and Republican. But if Trump does win, it'll be worth the ride. IMO, America is so far to the tipping point that anything is worth a shot to avoid the world Obama and Hillary are giving us.

What is it that you like about Trump, more and more as time goes by?

His inability to deal with simple political ploys such as this?

His unelectability is not a function of the stutus quo, his unelectability is a result of his mouth not communicating with his brain.

Now he is starting with his birther runt toward Cruz. He says born in Canada disqualify him,

Only wingnuts would not know that it is not where you are born, but if one of your parents is a US citizen. Trump knows that, only the wingnuts he is trying to convince to make him president do not. He is a dangerous demagogue and the sooner he exits this race the better.

I agree with the lack of choice between the two parties, bringing in a clown does not enhance the choice.

Claiming that HRC or Obama would. or does ,act similarly is arguable, but even if one was to agree, I don't see how their stupidity would in any way diminish Trump's.

Seems pretty clear to me that he likes Trump because he is NOT Obama or HRC, and would certainly be preferable to a HRC win.

Those who ridicule Trump ignore the fact that the Dem alternative is not a good choice. The front runner is a proven liar and a failure at Sec State.

Given a better candidate Trump would not have lasted a month, but they are all professional politicians, bought and paid for by the likes of Trump. Yes, Carson is also a non politician, but politically speaking he is a dead man walking.

Trump is also a proven liar when he said he personally saw all those treacherous muslims celebrating in the streets of new jersey after 9/11.

[iReason]

arjunadawn

"this longstanding seditious plan to overthrow America."

Fox "News"?

Are you chiming in from Oregon?

By the way, have you read the bible lately?

The Old Testament is a real page turner...

[gk10002000]

"Not if you're the person they are standing in front of. Try it next time at the cinema during a busy movie."

An absolutely ludicrous assertion.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with a political rally.

In your spare time, have a look at the video.

Gee, look at all the people standing...

Oops! The last one is from a WWF show...

Where is the guy with the colored hair , and the Mathew or whatever Biblical quote guy you used to always see at sports events? I see a lot of people that don't seem to have jobs that can go and stand around for hours

[arjunadawn]

By legal definition, what you have said is hate speech. Incomprehensibly hypocritical from someone who just a few days ago alleged that only the Left uses illogical, fallacious and emotional language against their political foes. You long list of websites does not include http://www.anti-cair-net.org Why not? Is that too obviously a nexus of recognisable hate speech.

1. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism. Clearly you have no evidence except slander otherwise they would be indicted. CAIR is an entity which is not responsible for the actions of individual members or associates, only for what the governing body does in its name. You should either present evidence of the involvement of CAIR in terrorism or withdraw the slander.

2. CAIR tried to suppress a 'tell all' book by a disgruntled former associate and lost the court case. The fact that CAIR was not successful in suppressing the book does not immediately validate the entire contents of that book. The attempt of suppression is no different from other organisations that want to manage their brand and the fact that they lost is a victory for the courts and free speech in America. However you use this as a vindication of the term Muslim Mafia. What does this mean? Well clearly you are making implications but with no substance. Perhaps you might provide the definition of Muslim Mafia used by the author of the said book so that people can determine the context for such incendiary speech?

3. Which nations have banned CAIR and for what reason under what laws? Do you mean Israel? Why should anyone just take what you are saying at face value?

4. Neither CAIR or the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt has been classified as a terrorist organisation by anyone apart from Ted Cruz and his sort of 'people'. Why should there be travel restrictions? Why should not the US administration be in dialogue with the muslim brotherhood? It is called diplomacy. They did, after all, win an election in Egypt. So we come once more to your tautology. I say CAIR is a terrorist organisation. Consequently Obama supports terrorism because he engaged with CAIR etc etc.

You construct elaborate arguments based on what you call self evidentiary positions and regard anything contrary to this as fallacious. Muslims are citizens of the United States. They have the same protections as all other citizens. They may organise advocacy groups. They may engage in political speech and political protest. They may even bear arms if they pass the background checks. People involved in hate speech against any group attempt to de-legitimize such groups as a way to strip them of lawful protections. There is nothing new about this. However, counter-intuitively, history has demonstrated that positive outcomes can be derived from allowing dissent, from engaging with opponents and antagonists in productive ways and demonstrating respect to all persons. Your way leads to conflict, I am afraid. People who engage in hate speech, generally out of fear, end up producing the outcomes which they fear the most. It seems it doesn't matter how highly educated a person is or how articulate they are in their expression, if they have no intrinsic respect for others, then their analysis and conclusions will always be flawed.

You began by noting how it was "incomprehensible" and succeeded in proving that it truly was... it was clearly "incomprehensible" to you.

Whenever the Left has nothing to offer they make a claim- Hate, islamophobia, racism, sexism, one legged manism... anything to personalize and distract. The disgusting paradox of our times frequently has those who object to hate speech being called haters. Its commonplace and evident in the post above. Witness this post, the marriage of the Left and Islamist doctrine, both mutually supportive. The poster above is wrong... on every single point, and of course in Leftist fashion elected to make the post about me as a central feature- "hate speech." I don't hate any and am always eager to avoid insulting posters, and people in general. I stick to proven facts and only rarely offer my own take on facts.

This "muslim woman" from the Trump rally is an islamist activist, not a regular ole gal just getting abused because of her hijab. The whole event was choreographed from the seating to the timing of the Judenstars to the standing. All timed by her cell on cue (see earlier post). http://www.infowars.com/what-they-didnt-tell-you-trump-silent-protester-is-actually-a-supporter-of-islamic-terrorism/

She most certainly is not just a "flight attendant." Yes, there is a broad plan uncovered by the FBI less than 10 years ago that discovered the role CAIR plays in a broad based subversion plan to overthrow America. This information was effectively "fruit of the forbidden tree" (IMO) in as much as it was discovered pursuant to discovery regarding the Holy Land Foundation shoveling money to terrorists, and CAIR and other front groups were just stumbled upon in a mind numbing find. What was found in a high ranking home of a Muslim Brotherhood operative was a detailed organization map, lots of documents detailing an incremental plan to subvert America, and one particularly linking document called "Civilization Jihad." There is nothing wrong with embracing ignorance as a source of withstanding the darkness, but do not force stupidity or ignorance on the rest of us. Of course these are facts. They are present everywhere online.

Response to diatribe.

1. CAIR FBI severed relations with the group after being an unindicted co conspirator in Holy Land Foundation trial where millions were funneled to Hamas (circa 2008). Note, it would not be slander, it would be libel. But it is not libel as this information is present everywhere and common knowledge to all except, apparently the poster above. See CAIR, wikipedia, United States Vs Holy Land Foundation, etc. One link: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/221895/coming-clean-about-cair-scott-w-johnson

2. CAIR uses the courts to enact a strategy of intimidation upon Americans. This is pertinent because CAIR conducts significant legal proceedings in the US as harassment. This example is typical of the lawfare CAIR wages against regular Americans. There are many... many cases that reflect the use of legal proceedings to intimidate. The only reason CAIR is not banned today is because Obama is a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and has placed some of its operatives in high security positions in the US previously (see Muslim Brotherhood Homeland Security adviser).

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/11/federal-court-grants-aflcs-motion-to-dismiss-hamas-linked-cairs-lawsuit-against-florida-gun-stores-muslim-free-zone

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=35438

http://www.anti-cair-net.org/

http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/cairs-use-lawfare-threats-shut-down-discourse-us

http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/dozens-of-lawsuits-used-to-hide-islamic-realities/

http://counterjihadreport.com/2014/04/14/council-on-american-islamic-relations-its-use-of-lawfare-and-intimidation/

http://www.pipelinenews.org/2014/may/19/islamic-lawfare-ndash-seditious-use-of-the-courts-to.html

http://www.meforum.org/916/cair-islamists-fooling-the-establishment

3. UAE banned CAIR. Point refuted. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/united-arab-emirates-ban-cair-other-us-brotherhood-groups

4. #4 Above post shows such a gross detachment from reality as to be alarming. The Muslim Brotherhood has always been banned in Egypt, for example. Or, for the vast part of the 20th century and later. Only under Obama was the MB permitted into the open. Obama's apology tour to Cairo had the entire front row of empty seats reserved for the Muslim Brotherhood, a disgusting offense to the nation that invited him to speak as they were then listed (and now) as a terrorist organization. See, Obama reserved seats for a terror group. After Obama's meddling and the people finally realized what Morisi and Obama were doing, the MB went back on the banned terror list. The Muslim Brotherhood is the parent of pretty much every islamic jihad group out there. Do some homework, this is all top search hits. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/united-arab-emirates-ban-cair-other-us-brotherhood-groups

http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,2032169,00.html

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/16/shocking-and-bizarre-cair-listed-as-a-terrorist-group-alongside-al-qaeda-and-the-islamic-state/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/16/shocking-and-bizarre-cair-listed-as-a-terrorist-group-alongside-al-qaeda-and-the-islamic-state/

No one is seriously considering banning American muslims. Trump is seriously considering banning non American muslims until water seeks its own level or the dust settles. However, a long known muslim has a very different point of view regarding Trump and muslims. When Trump can bring such men within his point of view, I must accept Trump is on to something.

[thaibeachlovers]

This OP's premise is the apology requested by CAIR CAIR is the facade of islamic jihad/Lawfare Jihad in America

CAIR is not an "advocacy group" (not in the manner this deceitful byline suggests). CAIR is a front group with the express goal of sedition- the overthrow of the United States of America. 1. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism- FBI. 2. CAIR just lost a lawsuit (most points) because an employee exposed CAIR and co wrote a book called "Muslim Mafia." CAIR asserts mercenary motives of the employee should stop book publishing. The courts ruled that such a motive, if true, does not immunize CAIR from the points raised in the book- it is a "Muslim Mafia," (my emphasis). 3. Other nations have recognized and banned CAIR as an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood's Civilization Jihad. 4. CAIR and the MB are uniquely aided and abetted by the Obama administration (this is beyond dispute), to include lifting travel restrictions on MB terrorists et al to enter the US unhindered, appointing Muslim Brotherhood member to the highest levels of Homeland Security.

Paying attention to the invention and development of this issue reveals all one needs to know about the mechanics of the Muslim Mafia in America. They consistently use the power of foreign monies to leverage enemies in protracted court battles to a) silence opposition to their Civilization Jihad, B ) force compliance or capitulation on islamic accommodations, and C) use legal mechanics to force "discovery" of their enemies knowledge/documents. (In fact, this last point was the singular reason CAIR had their arse handed to them in the courts for repeatedly refusing themselves to comply with discovery as they attempted to sue/Lawfare the authors of the book, "Muslim Mafia."

Americans/UK and Europeans had better wake up: CAIR/Muslim Brotherhood are not your friends and are certainly not "advocates" for anything wholesome and American/British/Western/Enlightened/Modern/Liberal. How foolish can one possibly be? These are not "advocacy" groups, not for any end you want your children inheriting. The Muslim Brotherhood is not to Islam what the Illuminati is to the NWO theorists- the Muslim Brotherhood is an overt (and covert) organization with the avowed goal of islamically globalizing the world and restoring the Kaliphah. No secrets here, only self delusion and self dhimmitude.

Understand the network and where CAIR fits into this longstanding seditious plan to overthrow America. It is a bold as it is repulsive.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6176

http://www.clarionproject.org/Muslim_Brotherhood_Explanatory_Memorandum#

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/17/us-group-cair-added-to-terror-list-by-united-arab-emirates.html

http://www.investigativeproject.org/1854/doj-cairs-unindicted-co-conspirator-status-legit#

http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/122.pdf

By legal definition, what you have said is hate speech. Incomprehensibly hypocritical from someone who just a few days ago alleged that only the Left uses illogical, fallacious and emotional language against their political foes. You long list of websites does not include http://www.anti-cair-net.org Why not? Is that too obviously a nexus of recognisable hate speech.

1. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism. Clearly you have no evidence except slander otherwise they would be indicted. CAIR is an entity which is not responsible for the actions of individual members or associates, only for what the governing body does in its name. You should either present evidence of the involvement of CAIR in terrorism or withdraw the slander.

2. CAIR tried to suppress a 'tell all' book by a disgruntled former associate and lost the court case. The fact that CAIR was not successful in suppressing the book does not immediately validate the entire contents of that book. The attempt of suppression is no different from other organisations that want to manage their brand and the fact that they lost is a victory for the courts and free speech in America. However you use this as a vindication of the term Muslim Mafia. What does this mean? Well clearly you are making implications but with no substance. Perhaps you might provide the definition of Muslim Mafia used by the author of the said book so that people can determine the context for such incendiary speech?

3. Which nations have banned CAIR and for what reason under what laws? Do you mean Israel? Why should anyone just take what you are saying at face value?

4. Neither CAIR or the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt has been classified as a terrorist organisation by anyone apart from Ted Cruz and his sort of 'people'. Why should there be travel restrictions? Why should not the US administration be in dialogue with the muslim brotherhood? It is called diplomacy. They did, after all, win an election in Egypt. So we come once more to your tautology. I say CAIR is a terrorist organisation. Consequently Obama supports terrorism because he engaged with CAIR etc etc.

You construct elaborate arguments based on what you call self evidentiary positions and regard anything contrary to this as fallacious. Muslims are citizens of the United States. They have the same protections as all other citizens. They may organise advocacy groups. They may engage in political speech and political protest. They may even bear arms if they pass the background checks. People involved in hate speech against any group attempt to de-legitimize such groups as a way to strip them of lawful protections. There is nothing new about this. However, counter-intuitively, history has demonstrated that positive outcomes can be derived from allowing dissent, from engaging with opponents and antagonists in productive ways and demonstrating respect to all persons. Your way leads to conflict, I am afraid. People who engage in hate speech, generally out of fear, end up producing the outcomes which they fear the most. It seems it doesn't matter how highly educated a person is or how articulate they are in their expression, if they have no intrinsic respect for others, then their analysis and conclusions will always be flawed.

If you want to experience real hatred, go to Saudi and preach Christianity in a public place.

The woman the OP is about was practicing silent hate ( speech ) against Trump by protesting in the middle of his supporters, and hoping to get abused to use against him.

Anyway, hateful or not, it's legal to say it in the US.

Trump does not owe that stirrer an apology. He may not even have known it was happening- how many people were there?

That woman was lucky to be able to walk out, and had she not been removed might have been taken out on a stetcher.

Edited January 12, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[hawker9000]

She stood up to protest and disrupt the meeting. She was led out. Nobody touched her. What does she want an apology for? Wonder what would happen if I went to an Obama townhall and just silently stood there every time somebody said something I didn't like? Do you think CNN would have let me or anybody else do that a few nights ago??? Or would I/we have been led out by force?

'Wonder what would happen if I showed up in "silent protest" at a mosque...

Precisely which of this woman's "rights" were violated?

Why the relevance to a mosque, was she potesting in a church?

But if you feel the need to attend a mosque and protest against trump im sure nothing will happen to you.

Lol. I think the word of the day here is "obtuse"...

[MiKT]

The evidence of disruption was there.....You!!! Rose Hamid!!! ...YOU, purposely went to this rally, with that in mind, as you knew you wouldn't be welcome.

Nice try....

Exactly. I am sick and tired of this Western "Who me?" crap where as long as people think they have a clever cover for action they have cover for status. In other words, as long as JackAs-es think they can articulate a clever excuse for their actions they are therefore provided total cover and can allege anything-- if it makes sense in your own mind the world must believe it. "I am just an innocent muslim woman who got kicked out for... for doing nothing at all. In fact, it was the other people who were staring at me, pointing at me, shouting 'Trump,' 'Trump.' Its their fault, not mine."

I am so sick of all these people. This behavior is not a muslim thing; most would never try this crap anywhere else in the muslim world because they would be beaten to death with a shoe for speaking such BS. This is an American thing where we teach everyone to claim victim hood and afford them goodies and jewels and free stuff because they "feel" hurt. This is an example of "Lawfare," using the existing legal and social constructs of our society to disable and blind us to what is right before us. The goal here is to perpetuate the fallacy that muslims are sacred cows in the US, above circumspection.

Aaah, these people again. Dam they get everywhere. I am so sick of them too.

Are they all Trumps family members, or just those who like to f.... their horses?

[lostboy]

This OP's premise is the apology requested by CAIR CAIR is the facade of islamic jihad/Lawfare Jihad in America

CAIR is not an "advocacy group" (not in the manner this deceitful byline suggests). CAIR is a front group with the express goal of sedition- the overthrow of the United States of America. 1. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism- FBI. 2. CAIR just lost a lawsuit (most points) because an employee exposed CAIR and co wrote a book called "Muslim Mafia." CAIR asserts mercenary motives of the employee should stop book publishing. The courts ruled that such a motive, if true, does not immunize CAIR from the points raised in the book- it is a "Muslim Mafia," (my emphasis). 3. Other nations have recognized and banned CAIR as an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood's Civilization Jihad. 4. CAIR and the MB are uniquely aided and abetted by the Obama administration (this is beyond dispute), to include lifting travel restrictions on MB terrorists et al to enter the US unhindered, appointing Muslim Brotherhood member to the highest levels of Homeland Security.

Paying attention to the invention and development of this issue reveals all one needs to know about the mechanics of the Muslim Mafia in America. They consistently use the power of foreign monies to leverage enemies in protracted court battles to a) silence opposition to their Civilization Jihad, B ) force compliance or capitulation on islamic accommodations, and C) use legal mechanics to force "discovery" of their enemies knowledge/documents. (In fact, this last point was the singular reason CAIR had their arse handed to them in the courts for repeatedly refusing themselves to comply with discovery as they attempted to sue/Lawfare the authors of the book, "Muslim Mafia."

Americans/UK and Europeans had better wake up: CAIR/Muslim Brotherhood are not your friends and are certainly not "advocates" for anything wholesome and American/British/Western/Enlightened/Modern/Liberal. How foolish can one possibly be? These are not "advocacy" groups, not for any end you want your children inheriting. The Muslim Brotherhood is not to Islam what the Illuminati is to the NWO theorists- the Muslim Brotherhood is an overt (and covert) organization with the avowed goal of islamically globalizing the world and restoring the Kaliphah. No secrets here, only self delusion and self dhimmitude.

Understand the network and where CAIR fits into this longstanding seditious plan to overthrow America. It is a bold as it is repulsive.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6176

http://www.clarionproject.org/Muslim_Brotherhood_Explanatory_Memorandum#

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/17/us-group-cair-added-to-terror-list-by-united-arab-emirates.html

http://www.investigativeproject.org/1854/doj-cairs-unindicted-co-conspirator-status-legit#

http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/122.pdf

By legal definition, what you have said is hate speech. Incomprehensibly hypocritical from someone who just a few days ago alleged that only the Left uses illogical, fallacious and emotional language against their political foes. You long list of websites does not include http://www.anti-cair-net.org Why not? Is that too obviously a nexus of recognisable hate speech.

1. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism. Clearly you have no evidence except slander otherwise they would be indicted. CAIR is an entity which is not responsible for the actions of individual members or associates, only for what the governing body does in its name. You should either present evidence of the involvement of CAIR in terrorism or withdraw the slander.

2. CAIR tried to suppress a 'tell all' book by a disgruntled former associate and lost the court case. The fact that CAIR was not successful in suppressing the book does not immediately validate the entire contents of that book. The attempt of suppression is no different from other organisations that want to manage their brand and the fact that they lost is a victory for the courts and free speech in America. However you use this as a vindication of the term Muslim Mafia. What does this mean? Well clearly you are making implications but with no substance. Perhaps you might provide the definition of Muslim Mafia used by the author of the said book so that people can determine the context for such incendiary speech?

3. Which nations have banned CAIR and for what reason under what laws? Do you mean Israel? Why should anyone just take what you are saying at face value?

4. Neither CAIR or the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt has been classified as a terrorist organisation by anyone apart from Ted Cruz and his sort of 'people'. Why should there be travel restrictions? Why should not the US administration be in dialogue with the muslim brotherhood? It is called diplomacy. They did, after all, win an election in Egypt. So we come once more to your tautology. I say CAIR is a terrorist organisation. Consequently Obama supports terrorism because he engaged with CAIR etc etc.

You construct elaborate arguments based on what you call self evidentiary positions and regard anything contrary to this as fallacious. Muslims are citizens of the United States. They have the same protections as all other citizens. They may organise advocacy groups. They may engage in political speech and political protest. They may even bear arms if they pass the background checks. People involved in hate speech against any group attempt to de-legitimize such groups as a way to strip them of lawful protections. There is nothing new about this. However, counter-intuitively, history has demonstrated that positive outcomes can be derived from allowing dissent, from engaging with opponents and antagonists in productive ways and demonstrating respect to all persons. Your way leads to conflict, I am afraid. People who engage in hate speech, generally out of fear, end up producing the outcomes which they fear the most. It seems it doesn't matter how highly educated a person is or how articulate they are in their expression, if they have no intrinsic respect for others, then their analysis and conclusions will always be flawed.

If you want to experience real hatred, go to Saudi and preach Christianity in a public place.

The woman the OP is about was practicing silent hate ( speech ) against Trump by protesting in the middle of his supporters, and hoping to get abused to use against him.

Anyway, hateful or not, it's legal to say it in the US.

Trump does not owe that stirrer an apology. He may not even have known it was happening- how many people were there?

That woman was lucky to be able to walk out, and had she not been removed might have been taken out on a stetcher.

I thought it pointless replying to Arjunamawn's response since it would take too much time to go point by point and clearly any response would not be accepted. However on your reply, I take issue with a few things.

What rationale do you provide for expecting moral equivalency between the practice of Islam in Saudi Arabia and the practice of Christianity in other countries (I presume you mean 'Christian' countries even though I do not believe these legally exist)? I generally see responses to that issues being emotional and ideological, not rational. That a Western Liberal democracy allows Muslims to worship in mosques in their country has entirely no relationship to or bearing on what Saudi Arabia does in terms of reciprocity. You may argue for reciprocity on the grounds of moral equivalency. I would probably agree with you and try and support your arguments. I do not believe, therefore that you can use the moral equivalency argument in your efforts to propagate anti-Muslim sentiment.

The second thing that I find disturbing is your assertion that speech against hate speech is itself hate speech. There are many definitions around. People can and do argue the details, intent and meaning of these definitions. Here's one "... speech that attracts, threatens, or insults a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, colour, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability" http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hate-speech The Wikipedia definition introduces the idea of 'protected groups'. Other nuances are reflected in other definitions. By definition then, I cannot see any way that protest or oral or written speech against hate speech being in any way able to be called hate speech in and of itself. It is a logical impossibility. A fallacy.

Was she provocative? Yes. Was she engaging in risky behaviour? Yes. Did she have the right to do it? Yes, despite the inane and specious arguments about the application of property rights law in relation so who rents the building. But the fact that you didn't like it or don't agree with it by no means classifies this as hate speech. It represents a fundamental lack of understanding or willingness to understand and acknowledge what minorities and oppressed people are actually saying; what they actually mean. Their voices, already institutionally oppressed, are further marginalised by the complete unwillingness to assign any legitimacy to what is being said or how it is being said. Trumps claim that Mexicans are rapist and murderers, that muslim people are terrorists is hate speech by definition.Ignoring and oppressing opposing views may be good for his ratings and appeal among the blue collar old man set but it only exacerbates the divide and diviciveness.

That stirrer, the one who has been excoriated by many old white men with exhortations of physical violence against here, is a brave person exercising her constitutional rights as an American. Long may she and others do so.