Nope. In fact, what I said was quite the opposite of giving them a place of their own. As for being nicer to Muslims, you simply aren't going to get the point so long as you insist on seeing all Muslims as indentical and interchangable. For the murderous jihadists, by all means go after them. We should so more to stop them than we are doing now. For the innocent Muslim who has no intention of hurting anyone? They shouldn't be treated like a murderous jihadist.
And if we really want to change the nature of our country so that it's permissible to persecute the innocent without trial or due process and it's OK to persecute people because of their religion, then we should define when it's permissible because leaving it to "It's OK to treat the Constitution as toilet paper if we are frightened enough," is not a good idea.
You’re a dishonest debater. I stated *very clearly* that non-jihad type Muslims who neither plan, plot, preach or teach jihad, if living in the US obviously, should be left alone.
You’re the one creating straw men and shooting them down. I merely use the examples *you gave me* and show the errors, and then you accuse me of using the examples you propose.
I don’t mind exchanging viewpoints with people who debate honestly, no matter how erroneous their beliefs. But you are a dirty fighter, so here is my last word to you:
ESAD.