Internment Camps for Muslims in th U.S?

[The Shadow]

Now that Trump has enacted a ban on immigration from majority Muslim countries, how long do you think it'll be before he says something should be done about Muslims already in the U.S? If there's any truth to this piece, my guess is not long.

Donald Trump Says He Might Have Supported Japanese Internment

[Trump]told TIME that he does not know whether he would have supported or opposed the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.
“I would have had to be there at the time to tell you, to give you a proper answer,” he said during a recent interview in his office in New York City. “I certainly hate the concept of it. But I would have had to be there at the time to give you a proper answer.”
Trump added that he believes wartime sometimes requires difficult choices. “It’s a tough thing. It’s tough,” he said.

[Daskinor]

I don't even think this ranks in the top 10 of the scary things Trump has said/done this last 10 days

[Greenday]

The courts are already shooting it down so this isn't happening.

Besides Gitmo and CIA blacksites of course.

[MadMike]

The courts are already shooting it down so this isn't happening.

I'm glad someone finally said "No" to that spoiled brat. That should have happened 60 years ago or so. He's used to always getting his way, and now that someone's telling him "no", he can't handle it.

[Greenday]

I'm glad someone finally said "No" to that spoiled brat. That should have happened 60 years ago or so. He's used to always getting his way, and now that someone's telling him "no", he can't handle it.

The majority of the country DID say no to him but he still became president anyway.

[ben_who]

I have a sense that this weekend's EO was a trial balloon - "Let's see what we can get away with, here." I mean, this is what, Day Eleven? There are at least six or seven steps in the "warning signs of Fascism" lists before "immigration restrictions" and he's missed a few of them.

The question I've been asking conservatives all weekend is if they feel safe. This was supposed to make them feel safe; do they feel safe? If they don't feel safe, what are they going to do next? Because the next step is usually heightened surveillance and registries.

Of course, it has nothing to do with being safe. Or even feeling safe. It's a dick-swinging contest.

[mjr]

Don't you have to disarm the populace, though? Isn't that under one of the tenets of fascism?

[Greenday]

Don't you have to disarm the populace, though? Isn't that under one of the tenets of fascism?

No, just the group you don't like.

[XCashier]

I'm glad someone finally said "No" to that spoiled brat. That should have happened 60 years ago or so. He's used to always getting his way, and now that someone's telling him "no", he can't handle it.

He's the poster child for Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He craves adoration, and when he doesn't get it, he flies to pieces, throws a Twitter tantrum and then does something even worse to get attention. It's mind-boggling how he got so far without getting the taking-down he desperately needs and deserves.

[Daskinor]

Don't you have to disarm the populace, though? Isn't that under one of the tenets of fascism?

Disarming the populace is actually quite low on the priority list of Fascist regimes. The idea of the population taking population rising up against the government in a show of arms is quite rare. At least in the sense of how Americans visualize it. Any home grown bring your guns and show up kinda rebellion would simply fail. What happens when the bullets run out. Or the food. Of if the leadership breaks down. Most armed rebellions start with the logistics taken care of first. See Civil War vs Whisky Rebellion.

By all accounts we would of lost the Revolutionary War if it where not for the French and Spanish fighting a proxy war using us. Sound Familiar...... Throw in the fact that the British people themselves did not give a flying fuck about the colonies after 8 years of no tax revenue and the money they where throwing in a whole to reclaim it.

In fact all the recent 'rebellions' against the federal government ended with little bloodshed because we are not a Fascist government. They would of used overpowering force to crush them, then use the media to spin a story to why they deserved it. While making sure to extol the virtues of the military and loyalty.

For your example in the case of Fascism you are restricting freedoms against an 'other' and turning your population against them.

So in this case, making laws that on ethnic group could not have guns would be what happens next.


tl;dr Governments don't care you have guns to fight them with, because while you might be able to sting. You are still an insignificant insect to them.

[ben_who]

Don't you have to disarm the populace, though? Isn't that under one of the tenets of fascism?

Received wisdom is that the Trump supporters have all the guns. I know that's not necessarily true, but there are other ways to disarm people you don't like.

For instance, think about the current push in some states to have public protesting labeled "economic terrorism" Terrorism is a felony; felons can't carry firearms. Start rounding up protestors on pretexts, book 'em under these laws, and there goes their Second Amendment capacity, as well as their right to vote.