Does trump still hate Muslims (1 Viewer)

[Lazybones]

For someone who hates Muslims this seems odd.

Trump Wants to Save China's Muslims from Genocide

President Trump's State Department is speaking up for more than a million Muslims in China's concentration camps, while Saudi Arabia is silent.

stream.org

 

[Archies Ghost]

For someone who hates Muslims this seems odd.

Trump Wants to Save China's Muslims from Genocide

President Trump's State Department is speaking up for more than a million Muslims in China's concentration camps, while Saudi Arabia is silent.

stream.org

He only wants to save them so he can deny them visas. He lives for that stuff.

 

[LA - L.A.]

For someone who hates Muslims this seems odd.

Trump Wants to Save China's Muslims from Genocide

President Trump's State Department is speaking up for more than a million Muslims in China's concentration camps, while Saudi Arabia is silent.

stream.org

The article contains nothing that shows Trump has actually done or said anything in support of China's Muslims. An isolated statement by someone in the State Department isn't evidence of Trump's feelings about Muslims one way or another.

 

[Lazybones]

If one reads the article, one will see it contains nothing that shows Trump has actually done or said anything in support of China's Muslims. An isolated statement by someone in the State Department isn't evidence of Trump's feelings about Muslims one way or another.

Lol, I think you may want to dig a little deeper. I’m pretty sure he pulled the visas yesterday because of this topic.

U.S. imposes visa restrictions on Chinese officials over Muslim treatment

The United States has imposed visa restrictions on Chinese government and Communist Party officials it believes responsible for the detention or abuse of Muslim minorities in Xinjiang province, the U.S. State Department said on Tuesday.

www.reuters.com

Would you like to walk back your statement?

 

[wardorican]

It is just leverage against China for the trade war discussions.

I'm sure members of the State Department care, but this is a leverage play. If/when we get a trade deal, we won't hear about this.

 

[Lazybones]

It is just leverage against China for the trade war discussions.

I'm sure members of the State Department care, but this is a leverage play. If/when we get a trade deal, we won't hear about this.

Show your work!!! Lol just kidding, I couldn’t help myself.

 

[Lazybones]

I find it odd that when he limited visas from terrorist supporting countries, the left hurled hate and vitriol. They claimed he was a racist and hated Muslims.

Now this happens and mums the word.

 

[wardorican]

Show your work!!! Lol just kidding, I couldn’t help myself.

From the article you posted...

"Secretary of State Mike Pompeo cited the decision of the Commerce Department on Monday to add 28 Chinese public security bureaus and companies - including video surveillance company Hikvision - to a U.S. trade blacklist over Beijing’s treatment of Uighur Muslims and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities. The visa restrictions “complement” the Commerce Department actions, he said."

We are on day 2 of the trade talk warm up, before the bigger fish talk tomorrow and Friday.

None of these actions are done in a vacuum.

 

[RobF]

I think the topic of the Uyghurs and China's mass detention camps is well worth discussing.

But perhaps starting with a blatantly partisan, hyperbolic and inaccurate report about a State Department press briefing from five months ago isn't the best way to do that.

For starters, it omits to mention that the press briefing only came after the House Foreign Affairs Committee had demanded a response on the issue more than once: https://engel.house.gov/latest-news...ation-response-to-chinas-human-rights-abuses/

It doesn't really get into the other countries that have similarly criticised China, or the countries that have defended them on the issue: https://www.axios.com/china-xinjian...ter-11662c7b-7bed-4881-bdb0-39b5482469a5.html

Being from five months ago, it also doesn't mention that the US has actually taken some actual action now in restricting visas, ostensibly because of this issue, but undeniably in the context of the ongoing trade dispute (as others have mentioned).

And naturally it doesn't mention that Trump has drastically reduced the number of refugees the US takes in, which is hard to swing as a very Christian thing to do.

Perhaps, if we seriously want to to discuss this topic, it would be better to start more objectively.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Lol, I think you may want to dig a little deeper. I’m pretty sure he pulled the visas yesterday because of this topic.

U.S. imposes visa restrictions on Chinese officials over Muslim treatment

The United States has imposed visa restrictions on Chinese government and Communist Party officials it believes responsible for the detention or abuse of Muslim minorities in Xinjiang province, the U.S. State Department said on Tuesday.

www.reuters.com

Would you like to walk back your statement?

Not at all. Everything I said about the article cited in your original post still stands as correct.

As Wardorican and RobF both pointed out, the visa issue has just as much, if not more, to do with the trade situation. There are Muslims all over the world being persecuted. What exactly has Trump said or done in support of any of them outside of China.

 

[Lazybones]

From the article you posted...

"Secretary of State Mike Pompeo cited the decision of the Commerce Department on Monday to add 28 Chinese public security bureaus and companies - including video surveillance company Hikvision - to a U.S. trade blacklist over Beijing’s treatment of Uighur Muslims and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities. The visa restrictions “complement” the Commerce Department actions, he said."

We are on day 2 of the trade talk warm up, before the bigger fish talk tomorrow and Friday.

None of these actions are done in a vacuum.

It was a joke. My point still stands.

 

[Lazybones]

Not at all. Everything I said about the article cited in your original post still stands as correct.

As wardorican pointed out, the visa issue has just as much, if not more, to do with the trade situation. There are Muslims all over the world being persecuted. What exactly has Trump said or done in support of any of them outside of China.

Im going to play along, as this is in response to all of you......

You guys act as if all actions taken by the USA and POTUS are altruistic. It seems that most people pick and chose how to apply the standard. Despite the motives, this is highlighting a serious atrocity.

The way I take what each of you are saying is as follows.

Wife, “ lazybones, the only reason you cleaned the kitchen Is to get some action tonight”

 

[Archies Ghost]

Im going to play along, as this is in response to all of you......

You guys act as if all actions taken by the USA and POTUS are altruistic. It seems that most people pick and chose how to apply the standard. Despite the motives, this is highlighting a serious atrocity.

The way I take what each of you are saying is as follows.

Wife, “ lazybones, the only reason you cleaned the kitchen Is to get some action tonight”

The idea that international relations is anything other than a continuous series of negotiated quid pro quo is a bit silly.

 

[wardorican]

It was a joke. My point still stands.

I know it was a joke.

I, obviously, could take the joke, but still delivered where my opinion came from, and... wait for it.... didn't get riled up about it.

The counter the 'hypocrisy argument".... the Muslim ban was a blanket ban on everyone from certain countries. Regardless of there was any wrong doing. This case is specific govt officials/agencies and companies black listed over specific treatment of people. (From what little I've read, I could be wrong)

To over simplify, it sounds like the current actions are like arresting people caught committing a crime... and the Muslim ban was like arresting everyone who lives in Baltimore, because crime is a bit high.

One is reasonable and fair, and the other is a hyperbolic/panicked response.

 

[Archies Ghost]

To over simplify, it sounds like the current actions are like arresting people caught committing a crime... and the Muslim ban was like arresting everyone who lives in Baltimore, because crime is a bit high.

One is reasonable and fair, and the other is a hyperbolic/panicked response.

It was more akin to locking the doors of your house when you see a biker gang rolling through town.

 

[MT15]

This is nothing more than a “gotcha” thread started to needle a group of people on a paper thin premise. Now, lazy can prove me wrong by actually engaging seriously on the topic because it’s probably worth discussing.

 

[LA - L.A.]

You guys act as if all actions taken by the USA and POTUS are altruistic. It seems that most people pick and chose how to apply the standard. Despite the motives, this is highlighting a serious atrocity.

In the future, please don't respond directly to something I wrote with a categorical "you guys" response.

I agree it's good that an atrocity is being highlighted.

I don't think or ever claimed Trump is altruistic. The original post made the claim that Trump was being altruistic to Muslims in China, therefore he isn't discriminatory against Muslims.

Nothing in this thread supports that claim.

 

[Lazybones]

It definitely isn’t a gotcha. I stated in a few post above, though this may not be altruistic, it highlights a serious problem.

To many times in the US, we are oblivious to these things. One would have thought that our media would be making a big deal out of this atrocity. I’m not sure as to what you want me to say.

I’m not an expert on internment camps in China. I put this out there to get conversations started on our new board. You can’t call it a gotcha just because it highlights something positive about this administration. I really thought we would have people coming across the isle saying this was a step in the right direction. I’m sadly disappointed.