• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dearborn’s Muslim mayor tells Christian he’s ‘not welcome’ in debate on honoring pro-terror Arab leader

This is a total and shameless witchhunt against Barham!

Now, if he'd said anything about Kirk or the MAGAs lionizing him? CANCEL DAT SUMBITCH!
 
I don't know. I wish he did. I wish we had a photo-negative reversal of MAGA to lead the Democrats, rather than the dickless, mealy-mouthed castrati choir we are stuck with led by Hakeem Jeffries, Chuck Schumer and Kenneth Martin.

I would rather have this confrontational stance than no pushback at all.
D'accord.
A reasonable centre can't be accomplished by countering a powerful extreme with, well, a reasonable centre. The middle ground will favour the extreme.
To put it another way, it's futile and self-defeating to try to compromise with extremists.
 
A reasonable centre can't be accomplished by countering a powerful extreme with, well, a reasonable centre. The middle ground will favour the extreme.
To put it another way, it's futile and self-defeating to try to compromise with extremists.

So Steve Bannon is right? This is war?
 
So Steve Bannon is right? This is war?

What war? You won. Your side has literally all the power and you are now silencing all opposition, and except for a few mayors in a few blue cities, the Democratic Party is letting you do whatever you want because they are just as non-liberal as you are. Crybully somewhere else.
 

So here’s the Democratic mayor of Dearborn, Michigan calling one of his citizens an “Islamophobe” because he questioned naming a street after a man who’s made what appear to be statements inciting terrorism (he says they were taken out of context), and that he’s not welcome in his own city. Unreal. Honestly, where is the Democratic Party taking this country? Is this what they call tolerance?

Are you kidding me? We elected a man who made what appeared to be statements inciting terrorism president of the United States.
 
A few years ago, something like this would have roused me to anger, and chide those on the left for not being willing to confront radical Islamist sentiment. But now, seeing who and what the country voted for, I do not care. Like, at all.

The city's residents get to name their streets after their heroes. Good for this mayor standing up for the majority of city residents against a local Karen.
My bro is not our country works. You have constitutional rights even if terrorist supporters hold the majority.
 
What war? You won. Your side has literally all the power and you are now silencing all opposition, and except for a few mayors in a few blue cities, the Democratic Party is letting you do whatever you want because they are just as non-liberal as you are. Crybully somewhere else.

Yes, clearly Charlie Kirk won.

But, yeah, leftists appear to be committing mass suicide with their stupidity. Cheering Charlie Kirk’s assassination and calling it “karma” isn’t helping their cause. Neither is this mayor. Many Americans (including me) aren’t necessarily pro Trump as much as they are anti-crazy and fanatic. It’s just a question of which side appears to be crazier or more fanatical, and Democrats are working hard to prove it’s them.
 
a man who’s made what appear to be statements inciting terrorism (he says they were taken out of context)


Seems to be a lot of "it was taken out of context!" claims flying around lately. Sauce for the goose, etc, etc, etc.

🤷‍♂️
 
Fine, I'll go there, what idiot told you that anyone with theocratic leans who also is in governance likes criticism of, or challenge to, their faith driven statements and actions?
 
Seems to be a lot of "it was taken out of context!" claims flying around lately. Sauce for the goose, etc, etc, etc.

🤷‍♂️

It literally was. We have a bunch of clips but not the video of the conversation between the minister and the mayor.
 
Seems to be a lot of "it was taken out of context!" claims flying around lately. Sauce for the goose, etc, etc, etc.

🤷‍♂️

Notice it’s usually the people who made the inflammatory statements saying they were taken out of context. I prefer to do my own due diligence, then draw my own conclusions. After seeing some of this guy’s comments, I’ve concluded that naming a street after him because he’s done good things for the community is nuts. Then again, I’m not surprised. Neither am I surprised that a Democrat would call a citizen he’s supposed to serve a bigot and an Islamophobe for pointing that out. 🤷‍♂️

“Silence is violence”—unless you support Muslims who think a terrorist holy war against Israel and the West is just spiffy:

Top Democrat officials in Michigan, including Governor Gretchen Whitmer, said to be a potential 2028 presidential candidate,[8] and Rep. Debbie Dingell, continue to support and platform openly pro-jihad community figures for political gain, neglecting their duty to fight the state's ongoing Islamist problem. The city of Dearborn, Michigan in particular is a longtime hub for public, outspoken support for jihad against the West and Israel, led by the Islamic Republic of Iran and its U.S.-designated terrorist arms Lebanese Hizbullah and Hamas.[9] Since the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, the hateful rhetoric by Dearborn figures has only escalated – yet Democrat officials continue to court them, turning a blind eye and even lending their implicit support to their hateful rhetoric and calls to violence.

 
Last edited:
Do you live in Dearborn?

No, I live in Mississippi. We wouldn’t put up with that shit here. I mean, naming a street after an Islamist terrorist supporter and then calling a Christian minister who points that out an Islamophobe? Then tell him he’s not welcome in his own city? That you’d hold a parade the day he left? Not happening. We’re still sane here.
 
Cool.

If the people in Dearborn agree with you, they'll do something about it.

I’d rather point out how Democrats don’t need to be running a dog kennel, let alone a country:

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer stayed silent for days after a controversy in Dearborn, where the city’s Muslim mayor scolded a Christian resident who objected to new street signs honoring an Arab American newspaper publisher known for past statements viewed as sympathetic to terrorists.

Fox News Digital tried to reach Whitmer’s office and staff Wednesday, a week after the Detroit Free Press first reported the Dearborn meeting kerfuffle.
 
You can’t incite people to terrorism in this country. That was the claim being made by the Christian minister and Dearborn resident. A Democratic mayor branded him a bigot and an Islamophobe for saying that. Democrats are fine with the First Amendment, but only for them. Anyone else is a fascist. 🤷‍♂️

Nothing says that you can't espouse fascist views. The 1A allows for that. It seems that you have conflated calling someone out for espousing fascist views with the idea of telling them they can't espouse them. They aren't the same thing. What he said WAS bigoted and Islamophobic....letting him know that in no way prevents him from continuing to say those things, so I'm not sure why you seem so keen on making this a 1A issue.
 
I’d rather point out how Democrats don’t need to be running a dog kennel, let alone a country


LMFAO!

As if the GOP has any sort of moral high ground given the current administration?

Good one, Ahleva!
 
No, I live in Mississippi. We wouldn’t put up with that shit here. I mean, naming a street after an Islamist terrorist supporter and then calling a Christian minister who points that out an Islamophobe? Then tell him he’s not welcome in his own city? That you’d hold a parade the day he left? Not happening. We’re still sane here.

Sure thing....won't name a street after an Islamic terrorist, but still rocking Jefferson Davis Avenue and John C. Calhoun Drive. Makes perfect sense.
 
Sure thing....won't name a street after an Islamic terrorist, but still rocking Jefferson Davis Avenue and John C. Calhoun Drive. Makes perfect sense.

There are MLK boulevards and streets all over the country, including in Mississippi. Don’t hold your breath waiting for Muslims in Dearborn to name one after a leading civil rights icon, Christian minister, and cofounder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Rather than honor people who championed the non-violence of Jesus, they support more militant types, like Muhammad and Hezbollah.
 
Sure thing....won't name a street after an Islamic terrorist, but still rocking Jefferson Davis Avenue and John C. Calhoun Drive. Makes perfect sense.

The avenue was not being named after a terrorist. It being named after a still-living Arab-American journalist who voiced praise for the leader of Hezbollah after Israel started attacking Lebanon.

To me, that is no more offensive (in fact, slightly less-so) than a street or avenue named after someone who is still supportive of Israel and the IDF.
 
No, I live in Mississippi. We wouldn’t put up with that shit here. I mean, naming a street after an Islamist terrorist supporter and then calling a Christian minister who points that out an Islamophobe? Then tell him he’s not welcome in his own city? That you’d hold a parade the day he left? Not happening. We’re still sane here.

An Islamist terrorist supporter? Have you been following the life and work of Osama Siblani? Or did you only just hear about him in the last two days in whatever your right-wing outrage feed of choice is? How is what he said any more offensive than someone praising Israel and the IDF nowadays?

And before you start typing about how horrible it is to praise the leader of Hezbollah because Hezbollah intentionally killed American servicemen nearly forty years ago, I would point out that Israel has intentionally killed many American servicemen and many, and many American citizens have died at the hands of Israelis, and no Israeli has ever been held criminally or civilly liable in Israel for doing so. Hell, I do not think an Israeli has ever been arrested for killing an American citizen.
 
Last edited:
Michigan?

Okay. I don't care.
 
Back
Top Bottom