We're excited to present a great new set of boards to classic movie fans with tons of new features, stability, and performance.

If you’re new to the message boards, please “Register” to get started. If you want to learn more about the new boards, visit our FAQ.

Register

If you're a returning member, start by resetting your password to claim your old display name using your email address.

Re-Register

Thanks for your continued support of the TCM Message Boards.

X

Kyle Kersten was a true friend of TCM. One of the first and most active participants of the Message Boards, “Kyle in Hollywood” (aka, hlywdkjk) demonstrated a depth of knowledge and largesse of spirit that made him one of the most popular and respected voices in these forums. This thread is a living memorial to his life and love of movies, which remain with us still.

X

Jump to content


Photo

Islamaphobes


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
55 replies to this topic

#21 Dargo

Dargo

    An "Acquired Taste"

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,063 posts
  • LocationSedona, Arizona

Posted 16 July 2017 - 04:31 PM

It's okay this time ... since your in England, after all.

 

laffite, as I am in Sedona Arizona, I will presume to correct your English. I believe the sentence should be:

 

"It's okay this time ... since you're in England, after all."

 

And in all candor, I've heard a rumor that Swithin is also very fussy about English, although of course certain usage issues may just be due to his being a big ol' Anglophile, and because that New York City boy spends so much of his time over there on that grouping of islands situated off the coast of continental Europe, and where for some inexplicable reason they STILL spell certain words within our shared common language inclusive of that oh-so needless letter 'u'.

 

;)


  • Swithin likes this

#22 laffite

laffite

    Oh Johnneeeeee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,725 posts
  • LocationSoCal

Posted 16 July 2017 - 03:49 PM

Lafitte, as I am in England I will presume to correct your English:  I believe the sentence should be:

 

"The sheer amount of these threads is withering."

 

In all candour, I've heard a rumour that Dargo is also very fussy about English; though of course certain usage issues may just be flavour of the month.

 

It's okay this time ... since your in England, after all.


  • Swithin likes this

#23 jamesjazzguitar

jamesjazzguitar

    There is nothing as bad as something not so bad

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,237 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 16 July 2017 - 02:28 PM

“Islamophobia” is not a constructive term—and words do matter. My intention is not to offend or inspire hatred in any form, but to promote honest conversation. In that spirit, I will outline the two major reasons that we should stop saying “Islamophobia.”

For starters, this idea silences honest criticism of Islam, which is something both necessary and warranted.

Let me be clear on this point: We should be criticizing the religion of Islam and its doctrines. We should absolutely not be criticizing all Muslim people. There is a massive difference and I am arguing in favor of the former and against the latter.

First, the doctrines of Islam are in fact worthy of high criticism. This is a religion whose holy book calls for the death of unbelievers, and for apostates to be slain. This same holy book grants men complete control over women, and openly permits and encourages brutal violence against women. This is a religion whose prophet ordered a woman to be stoned to death for adultery, and that anyone participating in homosexual activity is murdered. This is a religion that encourages torture, and that commands its adherents to fight blindly in the name of its God, even against their better judgment.

What’s more, there is an entire system of religious law, called Sharia, based solely on the Quran and the words of Muhammed, which happen to be the source of the atrocities I’ve just mentioned. And while it is easy to say that only “a few bad apples” believe in these things, that is simply not true. In a study conducted by Pew Research Center, for example, 99 percent of Muslims surveyed in Afghanistan supported Sharia being imposed as the official law of the land. While the numbers certainly differ by country, and there is variance even within Sharia supporters, the results are far from encouraging.

When one makes a truthful criticism of Islam and then is immediately silenced or condemned as an “Islamophobe,” it also silences the people who desperately need and want for that criticism to be heard, but can’t voice it themselves. With the privilege we have been granted, we can give a voice to those who most need one, and by using false claims of ignorance or bigotry to silence those trying to do just that, you are a contributor to the problem.

Also, the term “phobia” is unclear. By definition, a “phobia” is an extreme or irrational fear. While I do not believe fear is at all the best way to address this problem and actively advocate against fear, it is not inherently irrational to fear a doctrine or a set of ideas that calls for your death, or that endorses violence against women or that covets world domination.

Why is it there is no Christianity-ophobia, or Mormon-ophobia or Scientology-ophobia?

Because an author can write a book critical of Christianity and not have to go into hiding for years because of a Fatwah calling for their death. Salman Rushdie cannot say the same for Islam.

Because a cartoonist can publish a picture ridiculing Scientology, and not be killed for it. Stéphane Charbonnier cannot say the same for Islam.

No one should be killed for publishing a cartoon, or writing a book or leaving a religion, period. There should be no debate on this, no matter the circumstances, and it is not irrational to fear a doctrine that says otherwise.

Anti-Muslim bigotry is no doubt a problem and I do not want that to be lost in my criticisms. It needs to be fought whenever it rears its ugly head, but let’s call it what it is: anti-Muslim bigotry.

I am opposed to a “Muslim Ban” like the one our president and much of our country had called for. We cannot turn our backs on refugees that have found themselves in the worst of imaginable situations, yet we must keep an even head and think straight when discussing this issue.

Women’s rights, free speech, LGBT rights and religious freedom are all liberal values and values that represent everything great about the world, yet when someone truthfully criticizes the institution most threatening to those values, liberals often shout them down as “Islamophobic.” It is time for that to stop.

Islam as it currently stands is not a set of ideas that aligns itself with liberal values and actually stands at the antithesis of many of those values and that is simply a fact. That said, there are many liberal Muslims and Muslims who want to reform their religion for the better, and they are the ones who are really going to be able to do it. These are the people we should not only allow into this country, but encourage them to come and give them all of the possible support we can—and that starts with the truth.

Please, I implore you, stop silencing the truth and consider the consequences of doing so. Because for every night you lay in bed, satisfied with yourself for sniffing out another “Islamophobe,” a young girl in Afghanistan or Iraq or Pakistan lies voiceless in her bed, steeped in the dread of what tomorrow will bring.
K. Driessen

 

Well said.    All I can add is that as a secular humanist and atheist,  I'm more concerned about how the Christian religion tends to influence our laws and that this,  while unconstitutional in my view,  is accepted as 'normal' by the vast majority of conservative Christians.  E.g.   the overwhelming desire to ban same-sex-marriage.    Their fear of contraceptives.   Practices that clearly hurts no one.    The USA is a secular nation where no one religion should dominate public policy.

 

Note that in most countries the majority religion discriminates by passing religious based laws, but unlike the USA these are not secular nations.  E.g. in many states in India it is against the law to eat beef.   The so called reasoning that eating beef is being disrespectful to Hindus is an insane use of logic (just like SSM offending married Christian heterosexual couples).       

 

So glad the USA is a secular nation.   


  • Stephan55, Dargo, Sepiatone and 3 others like this

#24 Dargo

Dargo

    An "Acquired Taste"

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,063 posts
  • LocationSedona, Arizona

Posted 16 July 2017 - 01:09 PM

They may accept it as being trendy. ;)

 

Gentlemen, your logic, or what is attempting to pass for "logic" here is, well, all screwed up!

 

Let me ask you guys a question here. Would you not say it's MOST likely the case that it's in so-called "red states" where the denizens are more likely to NOT understand the concept of the separation of Church and State, and because those states are where people seem to be more traditional in their "beliefs"?

 

AND, would you not say that in so-called "blue states" is where a greater percentage of those "dreaded secularists" reside, and people who DO understand the aforementioned concept?

 

And so, why would "liberal states" be more inclined to the idea allowing Shiria Law to become codified within the framework of their states?

 

Nope, ya see gentlemen, while perhaps the thought of that concept which those in "red states" seem to be griping about a whole lot lately, YOU know, that whole concept about "Religious Freedom" so many so-called "Christians" utilize to THEIR benefit in order to often rationalize their OWN deep-seeded hostilities toward some of those "man-made" secular laws on the books and/or against others of a different faith or even no faith at all, AT LEAST within those blue states there seems to be MORE of an understanding that this country was AND is based upon the thought that it doesn't matter at all WHICH religion you may believe in and attempt to practice its tenets as YOU believe them to be, but ALSO that such a thing should NEVER EVER EVER BE THE LAW OF THE LAND IN THIS COUNTRY!!!

 

Aah, but alas, I know I've just wasted all these keystrokes here in order for you two to understand the logic of my post here, and because of course since almost the dawn of mankind's creation of the concept of religion, whatever the hell I say to you here AND no matter how much I'll hit you square between the eyes with the LOGIC contained within it, "true believers" will STILL use that old fall-back measure of "but MY GOD tells me you're wrong".

 

(...and I'm guessin' the very reason Lawrence earlier deleted his very well expressed and dripping with logic post in this thing, and because HE'S smart enough to know this...AND although in THIS case I may be called "a slow-learner", I'm now going to take a page out of Lawrence's "playbook" and thus THIS post of mine here will be the very LAST one I'LL submit within this thread...and pretty much 'cause YOU GUYS will never understand this, and primarily because of that aforementioned "but MY GOD tells me you're wrong" mindset)


  • Sepiatone likes this

#25 LatriceRoyale

LatriceRoyale

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 12:45 PM

“Islamophobia” is not a constructive term—and words do matter. My intention is not to offend or inspire hatred in any form, but to promote honest conversation. In that spirit, I will outline the two major reasons that we should stop saying “Islamophobia.”

For starters, this idea silences honest criticism of Islam, which is something both necessary and warranted.

Let me be clear on this point: We should be criticizing the religion of Islam and its doctrines. We should absolutely not be criticizing all Muslim people. There is a massive difference and I am arguing in favor of the former and against the latter.

First, the doctrines of Islam are in fact worthy of high criticism. This is a religion whose holy book calls for the death of unbelievers, and for apostates to be slain. This same holy book grants men complete control over women, and openly permits and encourages brutal violence against women. This is a religion whose prophet ordered a woman to be stoned to death for adultery, and that anyone participating in homosexual activity is murdered. This is a religion that encourages torture, and that commands its adherents to fight blindly in the name of its God, even against their better judgment.

What’s more, there is an entire system of religious law, called Sharia, based solely on the Quran and the words of Muhammed, which happen to be the source of the atrocities I’ve just mentioned. And while it is easy to say that only “a few bad apples” believe in these things, that is simply not true. In a study conducted by Pew Research Center, for example, 99 percent of Muslims surveyed in Afghanistan supported Sharia being imposed as the official law of the land. While the numbers certainly differ by country, and there is variance even within Sharia supporters, the results are far from encouraging.

When one makes a truthful criticism of Islam and then is immediately silenced or condemned as an “Islamophobe,” it also silences the people who desperately need and want for that criticism to be heard, but can’t voice it themselves. With the privilege we have been granted, we can give a voice to those who most need one, and by using false claims of ignorance or bigotry to silence those trying to do just that, you are a contributor to the problem.

Also, the term “phobia” is unclear. By definition, a “phobia” is an extreme or irrational fear. While I do not believe fear is at all the best way to address this problem and actively advocate against fear, it is not inherently irrational to fear a doctrine or a set of ideas that calls for your death, or that endorses violence against women or that covets world domination.

Why is it there is no Christianity-ophobia, or Mormon-ophobia or Scientology-ophobia?

Because an author can write a book critical of Christianity and not have to go into hiding for years because of a Fatwah calling for their death. Salman Rushdie cannot say the same for Islam.

Because a cartoonist can publish a picture ridiculing Scientology, and not be killed for it. Stéphane Charbonnier cannot say the same for Islam.

No one should be killed for publishing a cartoon, or writing a book or leaving a religion, period. There should be no debate on this, no matter the circumstances, and it is not irrational to fear a doctrine that says otherwise.

Anti-Muslim bigotry is no doubt a problem and I do not want that to be lost in my criticisms. It needs to be fought whenever it rears its ugly head, but let’s call it what it is: anti-Muslim bigotry.

I am opposed to a “Muslim Ban” like the one our president and much of our country had called for. We cannot turn our backs on refugees that have found themselves in the worst of imaginable situations, yet we must keep an even head and think straight when discussing this issue.

Women’s rights, free speech, LGBT rights and religious freedom are all liberal values and values that represent everything great about the world, yet when someone truthfully criticizes the institution most threatening to those values, liberals often shout them down as “Islamophobic.” It is time for that to stop.

Islam as it currently stands is not a set of ideas that aligns itself with liberal values and actually stands at the antithesis of many of those values and that is simply a fact. That said, there are many liberal Muslims and Muslims who want to reform their religion for the better, and they are the ones who are really going to be able to do it. These are the people we should not only allow into this country, but encourage them to come and give them all of the possible support we can—and that starts with the truth.

Please, I implore you, stop silencing the truth and consider the consequences of doing so. Because for every night you lay in bed, satisfied with yourself for sniffing out another “Islamophobe,” a young girl in Afghanistan or Iraq or Pakistan lies voiceless in her bed, steeped in the dread of what tomorrow will bring.
K. Driessen
  • darkblue, Stephan55, jamesjazzguitar and 1 other like this

You cannot have it both ways.  A dancer who relies upon the doubtful comforts of human love can never be a great dancer. Never!

 

Boris Lermontov


#26 hamradio

hamradio

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,451 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 11:20 AM

I'm all for Sharia Law being imposed in liberal states, let's see how long it lasts.

 

They may accept it as being trendy. ;)



#27 MovieMadness

MovieMadness

    Bogie Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,746 posts
  • LocationHigh Sierra

Posted 16 July 2017 - 11:11 AM

I'm all for Sharia Law being imposed in liberal states, let's see how long it lasts.


  • hamradio and JR33928 like this

Things are never so bad they can't be made worse.


#28 hamradio

hamradio

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,451 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 11:07 AM

They either foster the same irrational hate, or perhaps they're Jewish?

 

Who can tell?

 

What's amusing is that they seem to believe Islam is the ONLY religion in which it's followers perform unspeakable acts against "non-believers".

 

But remember.....

 

HITLER and the NAZIS were NOT Muslim.

 

Neither was THE SPANISH INQUISITION.

 

Nor is the KU KLUX KLAN.

 

Or the ROMANS.

 

And to believe that ALL Muslims are violent propagators of attacks on Western culture is on the same level as believing that....

 

All IRISH are drunkards.....

 

All Africa-Americans are theives and "gang-bangers"...and thrive on CARP....

 

All MEXICANS are basically lazy....

 

All ITALIANS are greasy women chasing WINOS....

 

And the list goes on.

 

Sepiatone

 

All Christians are bigots.



#29 Swithin

Swithin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,664 posts
  • LocationNew York City

Posted 16 July 2017 - 11:07 AM

The sheer amount of these threads are withering ... most retrograde to any sense of restraint.

 

Lafitte, as I am in England I will presume to correct your English:  I believe the sentence should be:

 

"The sheer amount of these threads is withering."

 

In all candour, I've heard a rumour that Dargo is also very fussy about English; though of course certain usage issues may just be flavour of the month.


  • Dargo likes this

#30 Sepiatone

Sepiatone

    Enhanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,085 posts
  • LocationLincoln Park, MI

Posted 16 July 2017 - 11:02 AM

They either foster the same irrational hate, or perhaps they're Jewish?

 

Who can tell?

 

What's amusing is that they seem to believe Islam is the ONLY religion in which it's followers perform unspeakable acts against "non-believers".

 

But remember.....

 

HITLER and the NAZIS were NOT Muslim.

 

Neither was THE SPANISH INQUISITION.

 

Nor is the KU KLUX KLAN.

 

Or the ROMANS.

 

And to believe that ALL Muslims are violent propagators of attacks on Western culture is on the same level as believing that....

 

All IRISH are drunkards.....

 

All Africa-Americans are theives and "gang-bangers"...and thrive on CARP....

 

All MEXICANS are basically lazy....

 

All ITALIANS are greasy women chasing WINOS....

 

And the list goes on.

 

Sepiatone


  • Stephan55 and TomJH like this

I started out with NOTHING...and still have most of it left!


#31 Sepiatone

Sepiatone

    Enhanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,085 posts
  • LocationLincoln Park, MI

Posted 16 July 2017 - 07:58 AM

ISLAMOPHOBIA

A phobia is an irrational fear. Rationally speaking out against a principle or idea one is opposed to is not a phobia.

- One may support democracy therefore oppose the theocratic rule which Sharia demands and Muslim countries end up with.

- One may believe women are equal to men and therefore oppose the idea that women are second class citizens which is at the core of Islam.

- One may believe in freedom of and from religion, and therefore oppose any system where apostasy earns a death sentence.

Thus one may oppose Islamist ideology, logically and without any 'phobia' at all.

Islamophobia is a meaningless word and often a slanderous and misleading accusation used in forms of communication reminiscent of Goebellian propaganda. One may calmly and rationally oppose any and all belief systems which by doctrine declare open war on democracy, gender equality, gays, apostates and unbelievers. That is no phobia. That is rational opposition to an offensive idea utilizing reason, logic and rhetoric.

My coining the term  ISLAMAPHOBE is  based on the irrational fear  that all who embrace Islam in this country are members of some terrorist "sleeper cell" and just waiting for the opportunity for a takeover.

 

Comparable to homophobe,  which too, is an irrational fear.  Which, as you may recall, came to the forefront by those nail biters who feared allowing same sex marriages would bring about an epidimic of homosexuality and men leaving their wives and families to move in with other men, and even start wanting to marry goats, pigs and other animals.

 

And of course, that's yet to happen.

 

And while you do make a somewhat valid point, it all only clearly shows you've completely missed MINE, which was that it's OK to HATE something or someone, but preferrable if that hatred is based on something other  than misconception and irrational fear.  to whit:

 

Black people do NOT want to move next door to you in order to marry your daughter or steal your possesions....

 

Gay people have NO desire to molest your children, nor "convert" heterosexuals to their "lifestyle", or even "recruit" your children to homosexuality.

 

And that HATING something or someone DOESN'T give anyone the right to do them harm, or or deny them or it the right to exist.  You only do THAT at the risk of becoming that which you hate and fear.

 

 

Sepiatone


  • Stephan55 and Princess of Tap like this

I started out with NOTHING...and still have most of it left!


#32 darkblue

darkblue

    child of vision

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,765 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 07:40 AM

But after all that typing, I hit "post" and then was informed that I was "not allowed" to reply to that topic!

 

Did you cry?

 

I bet you cried.


  • NipkowDisc likes this
White Knights, Manginas and Simps, oh my!

#33 darkblue

darkblue

    child of vision

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,765 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 07:35 AM

ISLAMOPHOBIA

A phobia is an irrational fear. Rationally speaking out against a principle or idea one is opposed to is not a phobia.

- One may support democracy therefore oppose the theocratic rule which Sharia demands and Muslim countries end up with.

- One may believe women are equal to men and therefore oppose the idea that women are second class citizens which is at the core of Islam.

- One may believe in freedom of and from religion, and therefore oppose any system where apostasy earns a death sentence.

Thus one may oppose Islamist ideology, logically and without any 'phobia' at all.

Islamophobia is a meaningless word and often a slanderous and misleading accusation used in forms of communication reminiscent of Goebellian propaganda. One may calmly and rationally oppose any and all belief systems which by doctrine declare open war on democracy, gender equality, gays, apostates and unbelievers. That is no phobia. That is rational opposition to an offensive idea utilizing reason, logic and rhetoric.

 

Alright! Someone who's not a sissy or willing to sell out their own parentage just because they're terrified of Islam.

 

You give us hope, Latrice. 


White Knights, Manginas and Simps, oh my!

#34 Princess of Tap

Princess of Tap

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,317 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 04:07 AM

Still+waiting+for+any+half+life+related+


While you're waiting it might be a good idea to learn Russian.

For example:


Spaseeba,

Gospodin Putin

#35 hamradio

hamradio

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,451 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 03:44 AM

hamradio--Collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign IS proven.  It's there in the emails Donny Jr. so thoughtfully posted on Twitter for everyone to read.  What remains to be proven is in the emails and material the emails lead to.  I'm just waiting for Donny to be subpoenaed by the Senate, House, or Mueller's Committee.  Then things should get really interesting. 

 

Still+waiting+for+any+half+life+related+


  • darkblue likes this

#36 film lover 293

film lover 293

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,055 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 03:38 AM

hamradio--Collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign IS proven.  It's there in the emails Donny Jr. so thoughtfully posted on Twitter for everyone to read.  What remains to be proven is in the emails and material the emails lead to.  I'm just waiting for Donny to be subpoenaed by the Senate, House, or Mueller's Committee.  Then things should get really interesting. 



#37 mr6666

mr6666

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 19,376 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 12:36 AM

What's good for the goose is...(Like Trump, has to be proven)

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...rial/index.html

 

http://www.washingto...article/2628480

 

",...the Clinton campaign “did the same thing.” The evidence? A Politico investigation showing the DNC gathered information from a Ukrainian political operative. Conveniently left out, though, is that those efforts were to expose Paul Manafort’s very problematic ties to Russia—information that was released to the public and obtained lawfully by a Ukrainian anti-corruption probe.

And that’s really the big point.

When digging for “dirt,” you should not pursue information obtained illicitly, whether by Russian hackers or Nixonian Plumbers. And if by chance you stumble across it, you do what anyone running for office should do—report it to the authorities."

 

http://www.politico....ng-about-215381


  • film lover 293 likes this

"A small elephant is not a rabbit."


#38 hamradio

hamradio

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,451 posts

Posted 15 July 2017 - 11:20 PM

hamradio--Trump Jr. responded to an email promising dirt on H. Clinton FROM Russian operative(s).  Daddy Trump said he was doing "opposition research".  One of the first things the Democrat and Republican Parties teach is how to do your job WITHOUT breaking the law.  One of the big no-nos is responding to FOREIGN AGENTS promising "dirt" on the opponent!

 

The first thing a researcher should do when faced with that situation is CALL THE FBI!

 

Did Donny Jr. call the FBI when faced with this situation?  No.  He replied to the email that promised information about H. Clinton and said "Love It!"

 

The idiot then posted the entire(?) email thread on Twitter!!????

 

Now Donny Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort can go to their tailors and get fitted for prison uniforms--or make a deal and squeal to Muellers' Committee.

 

Collusion has been proven; on to the next step in the Russia investigation, wherever the emails lead.  All that smoke did conceal a fire.

 

 

What's good for the goose is...(Like Trump, has to be proven)

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...rial/index.html

 

http://www.washingto...article/2628480



#39 LawrenceA

LawrenceA

    Hothead

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,722 posts
  • Locationaround the neighborhood

Posted 15 July 2017 - 11:08 PM

On second thought, I'll delete my comments and let everyone else's stand on their own merits. I don't feel like getting into a religious debate again on here, and it's not like anyone's mind is going to be changed.

 

My apologies to Dargo, who "Liked" my post before I got rid of it.


Edited by LawrenceA, 16 July 2017 - 12:25 AM.

  • Dargo likes this

#40 film lover 293

film lover 293

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,055 posts

Posted 15 July 2017 - 11:06 PM

hamradio--Trump Jr. responded to an email promising dirt on H. Clinton FROM Russian operative(s).  Daddy Trump said he was doing "opposition research".  One of the first things the Democrat and Republican Parties teach is how to do your job WITHOUT breaking the law.  One of the big no-nos is responding to FOREIGN AGENTS promising "dirt" on the opponent!

 

The first thing a researcher should do when faced with that situation is CALL THE FBI!

 

Did Donny Jr. call the FBI when faced with this situation?  No.  He replied to the email that promised information about H. Clinton and said "Love It!"

 

The idiot then posted the entire(?) email thread on Twitter!!????

 

Now Donny Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort can go to their tailors and get fitted for prison uniforms--or make a deal and squeal to Muellers' Committee.

 

Collusion has been proven; on to the next step in the Russia investigation, wherever the emails lead.  All that smoke did conceal a fire.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users