Michigan official stands by call for killing of all Muslims

steve knight

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 28, 2009
2,596
6,958
quality person here. sad there are plenty that will agree with him.

https://apnews.com/d3f16af12b3e4863a262f85f690d5fd0

KALKASKA, Mich. (AP) — A local official in northern Michigan refuses to apologize for sharing Facebook posts calling for the killing of “every last Muslim” and for nuclear weapons to be used on the world’s 10-largest Muslim-majority cities.

Jeff Sieting, the village president in Kalkaska, which is about 230 miles (370 kilometers) northwest of Detroit, said Monday that he doesn’t owe anyone an apology over his Facebook posts, the Record-Eagle of Traverse City reported
The posts were discovered by area native Cindy Anderson, who along with others unsuccessfully sought an apology last month. They’re now looking to remove Sieting from office.

“You ran for office to represent all of the people of this community, not just the white, non-Muslim ones,” Anderson said to Sieting. “You were supposed to represent all of your constituents.”

One post Sieting shared said Muslims are destructive and “there is simply no place for them in our world.” The post also called for using nuclear weapons against the 10 largest Muslim-majority cities, as well as pilgrimage sites.

Sieting said his comments are protected by the First Amendment and that those trying to oust him from office are only doing so because they oppose President Donald Trump.

“I don’t expect everyone to see things the way I do,” he said.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: motulist and Huntn

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
If you can't figure that out from what the official said and Trump's position then that's on you. Sometimes I think you just comment and don't actually read anything someone posts.
actually it's on you. here let me help you out.
A local official in northern Michigan refuses to apologize for sharing Facebook posts calling for the killing of “every last Muslim” and for nuclear weapons to be used on the world’s 10-largest Muslim-majority cities.
by all means show trump proposing the same thing... since Obama BOMBED more countries that even Bush, Obama is far closer to the officials view than trump is.......
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,177
USA
actually it's on you. here let me help you out.

by all means show trump proposing the same thing... since Obama BOMBED more countries that even Bush, Obama is far closer to the officials view than trump is.......
No thanks. But I love that you brought Obama into the conversation. I stand by my post. Trump amp'd up the hate for any/all muslims among his followers. If you choose to ignore that - that's on you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MadeTheSwitch

BeeGood

macrumors 68000
Sep 15, 2013
1,801
4,841
Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
If you can't figure that out from what the official said and Trump's position then that's on you. Sometimes I think you just comment and don't actually read anything someone posts.

Well...I'm not sure I would agree that Trump is enabling this clown.

I would agree that Trump's caustic rhetoric might have emboldened him though. But like @jkcerda said, Trump has never said he wanted to kill Muslims. He doesn't want them here, but he doesn't want them dead as far as I know.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
No thanks. But I love that you brought Obama into the conversation. I stand by my post. Trump amp'd up the hate for any/all muslims among his followers. If you choose to ignore that - that's on you.
love how you deflected from Obama bombing more than trump and being more in line with the guy who spouted out his stupidity .
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,177
USA
actually you brought trump in when it was not mentioned,,,,,,,,,,,, and then pretended to be on topic by once again deflecting from the fact Obama is more in line with the POS officials view based on Obamas ACTIONS........
Actually no - the article and official refers to Trump specifically: "Sieting said his comments are protected by the First Amendment and that those trying to oust him from office are only doing so because they oppose President Donald Trump."

No deflection. It's a false equivalence to refer to Obama's actions vs Trump's rhetoric before getting elected and since. I know you hate Obama and will bring him into every conversation - regardless of whether it's warranted.It's all good. Maybe it's the head injury? ;)
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
Actually no - the article and official refers to Trump specifically: "Sieting said his comments are protected by the First Amendment and that those trying to oust him from office are only doing so because they oppose President Donald Trump."

No deflection. It's a false equivalence to refer to Obama's actions vs Trump's rhetoric before getting elected and since. I know you hate Obama and will bring him into every conversation - regardless of whether it's warranted.It's all good. Maybe it's the head injury? ;)
NOT A false equivalency you simply don't like the fact Obama is has done far more to kill Muslims that even Bush did, I will stand corrected as I did not read trumps name on the quote.
[doublepost=1499961356][/doublepost]
If you watched just about any of his campaign stops, you either would not ask that question or I've been giving you more credit than you deserve.
try post 6.
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,177
USA
NOT A false equivalency you simply don't like the fact Obama is has done far more to kill Muslims that even Bush did, I will stand corrected as I did not read trumps name on the quote.
[doublepost=1499961356][/doublepost]
try post 6.
What I like is irrelevant. Trump has incited people in this country against Muslims. Hence he has been an enabler. See post #2. Thanks and have a nice day.
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
May 5, 2008
17,061
16,578
The Misty Mountains
NOT A false equivalency you simply don't like the fact Obama is has done far more to kill Muslims that even Bush did, I will stand corrected as I did not read trumps name on the quote.
[doublepost=1499961356][/doublepost]
try post 6.
Post 6 does not answer enabler. For the purpose of this discussion, incitement = enabler.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: samcraig

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,177
USA
so ALL Muslims are terrorist to you?
Please get checked out. I sincerely think your head injury is affecting your posts. At no time did I ever say that. Not remotely. Not even close. In fact - I find it offensive you would even joke or try to make that assertion.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
Please get checked out. I sincerely think your head injury is affecting your posts. At no time did I ever say that. Not remotely. Not even close. In fact - I find it offensive you would even joke or try to make that assertion.
trump is trying to keep the terrorist out, it does NOT apply to ALL Muslims and proof is that NOT EVERY Muslim nation was on the ban, he had the wrong nations BUT that is a different story.
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,177
USA
trump is trying to keep the terrorist out, it does NOT apply to ALL Muslims and proof is that NOT EVERY Muslim nation was on the ban, he had the wrong nations BUT that is a different story.
You're missing the mark. Unless you are saying that those who support Trump care about which Muslims and that none of them have been encouraged by Trump's rhetoric on the campaign trail and afterwards to want all Muslims gone.

PS - we know there's at least one right? Because it's pretty clear in the OP that the official feels justified. Maybe you don't understand what being enabled means. If not - my apologies.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,011
Criminal Mexi Midget
You're missing the mark. Unless you are saying that those who support Trump care about which Muslims and that none of them have been encouraged by Trump's rhetoric on the campaign trail and afterwards to want all Muslims gone.

PS - we know there's at least one right? Because it's pretty clear in the OP that the official feels justified. Maybe you don't understand what being enabled means. If not - my apologies.
extremely low bar set there..............o_O

apology accepted :);)