Donald Trump: ban all Muslims entering US

[umbertino]

Republican frontrunner wants ‘total and complete shutdown’ of borders to Muslims after San Bernardino shooting in latest boundary-pushing proposal

 

 

 

Ed Pilkington in Charleston, South Carolina

 

Tuesday 8 December 2015 00.27 GMT

 

 

 

 

Donald Trump, the leading contender to become the Republican party’s nominee for US presidential candidate, has called for a “total and complete shutdown” of the country’s borders to Muslims in the wake of the San Bernardino terrorist attack.

 

Trump made his most extreme pledge yet – in a race in which he has consistently pushed the boat out on issues of race and immigration – in a statement released to the media through his presidential campaign team.

 

He said there was such hatred among Muslims around the world towards Americans that it was necessary to rebuff them en masse, until the problem was better understood.

 

 

“Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life,” the billionaire real estate developer said.

 

Trump put out his incendiary proposal just hours before he was scheduled to appear at a rally on board the USS Yorktown, a second world war aircraft carrier that is berthed near Charleston, South Carolina. The military location was carefully chosen for an address that falls on the 74th anniversary of the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbor that brought America into the war. After being interrupted several times aboard the ship, he said the proposal was “probably not politically correct, but I don’t care”.

 

To justify his extreme call for a total rejection of all Muslims seeking to enter the US, Trump turned to what he claimed to be polling data that underlined what he said was the violent hatred of followers of the faith toward Americans. However, the statement cites the Center for Security Policy, an organisation branded extremist by anti-race-hatred campaigners at the Southern Poverty Law Center.

 

“Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won’t convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women,” Trump’s “policy statement” said.

 

The former reality TV star added: “Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine.”

 

Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski said Trump’s proposed ban would apply to “everybody”, including Muslims seeking immigration visas as well as tourists seeking to enter the country. Another Trump staffer confirmed that the ban would also apply to American Muslims who were currently overseas – presumably including members of the military and diplomatic service. “This does not apply to people living in the country,” Trump said in an interview on Fox News, “but we have to be vigilant.”

 

In an interview with the Guardian, Trump senior policy adviser Sam Clovis said: “I don’t think there is anything wrong about asking about religious affiliation.”

 

Trump’s remarks immediately drew condemnation from Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley, who tweeted: “@realdonaldtrump removes all doubt: he is running for President as a fascist demagogue.” Other politicians on both sides of the aisle quickly followed suit – including former vice-president **** Cheney.

 

Trump has come under fire before for his contentious views on how to deal with the threat of domestic radicalization of Muslims. He has refused to rule out creating a government database of all American Muslims.

 

He has also called for the deportation of 11 million undocumented Hispanics, as well as said were he elected president, he would build a wall along the border with Mexico.

 

Since the Paris attacks orchestrated by Islamic State, and last week’s attack in San Bernardino, California by a married couple inspired by the terror group, Trump has sought to build his already substantial lead over his Republican presidential rivals by portraying himself as being tougher than all others on national security.

 

He responded in a tweet on Sunday night to President Obama’s Oval Office address on combating the Isis threat by saying: “Is that all there is? We need a new President – FAST!”

 

In his address to the nation on Sunday night, the president was at his most passionate when he made an appeal to Americans for tolerance in the aftermath of the California shooting.

Obama specifically sought to underscore that while Muslims have a responsibility to identify and reject extremism within their ranks, Americans cannot lose sight of the fact that the vast majority of Islam’s more than a billion followers are peaceful.

 

 

 

“We cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam,” Obama said. “That, too, is what groups like Isil want. Isil does not speak for Islam. They are thugs and killers. Part of a cult of death. And they account for a tiny fraction of a more than a billion Muslims around the world, including millions of patriotic Muslim Americans who reject their hateful ideology.

 

“Muslim Americans are our friends and our neighbors. Our co-workers. Our sports heroes. And, yes, they are our men and women in uniform who are willing to die in defense of our country,” he added. “We have to remember that.”

 

Trump’s threat was met with perplexed anger on the part of prominent Muslim American groups. Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the largest such group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said on Twitter: “Where is there left for him to go? Are we talking internment camps? Are we talking the final solution?”

 

 

Republican presidential rival Lindsey Graham, one of a number who have seen their prospects of making headway in the campaign subsumed by Trump’s dominance, said: “What has been in the past absurd and hateful has turned dangerous.”

 

He told the Guardian: “Donald Trump today took xenophobia and religious bigotry to a new level. His comments are hurting the war effort and putting our diplomats and soldiers serving in the Middle East at risk. The way to win this war is to reach to the vast majority of people in Islamic faith who reject Isil and provide them the capability to resist this ideology.

 

“Today’s statement embraces a ‘fortress America’ approach, is doomed to fail and shows a complete lack of understanding by Donald Trump as to what the war is all about. As to interpreters and others who have helped American military in Iraq and Afghanistan, this policy, if enacted, would be a death sentence.”

 

Trump’s choice of polling data to hold up his highly controversial views was in itself inflammatory. He cited data that purported to show that a quarter of those Muslims polled – Trump did not specify what the sample group was, nor even what part of the world he was referring to – “agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of global jihad”.

 

More than half of the unspecified sample group “agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah”.

 

The data was drawn from the Center for Security Policy, a neoconservative thinktank based in Washington DC whose founder and president, Frank Gaffney, is a prominent US Islamophobe. The Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate speech in the country, has described Gaffney as being “gripped by paranoid fantasies about Muslims destroying the west from within”.

 

The SPLC said that “Gaffney believes that ‘creeping Shariah’, or Islamic religious law, is a dire threat to American democracy”.

 

In 2011, Gaffney, a former Pentagon official in the Reagan administration, was barred from the influential Conservative Political Action Conference having suggested that two of its organizers had connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

Additional reporting by Ben Jacobs in Washington

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/07/donald-trump-ban-all-muslims-entering-us-san-bernardino-shooting

 

[yota691]

Trump On His Plan To Ban Muslims: 'Not Politically Correct, But I Don't Care'

Updated December 8, 20155:17 AM ET

DON GONYEA

Twitter

DOMENICO MONTANARO

Twitter

 

Audio for this story from Morning Edition will be available at approximately 9:00 a.m. ET.

Donald Trump speaks to the crowd at a Pearl Harbor Day Rally at the U.S.S. Yorktown in Mt. Pleasant, S.C.

Sean Rayford/Getty Images

The latest pronouncement from the presidential campaign of Donald Trump calls for the U.S. to refuse to let any Muslim — from anywhere — into the United States.

It has prompted very strong criticism, including from some of his fellow Republican candidates and state party leaders.

The Philadelphia Daily News' cover Tuesday morning labels Trump, "The New Furor."

Trump's proposal came the day after President Obama's Sunday night televised address from the Oval Office of the White House in which the president urged Americans to reject discrimination against Muslim Americans.

Trump's response?

"I wrote something today that I think is very very salient, very important, and probably not politically correct, but I don't care," Trump said at a rally on an aircraft carrier turned museum in South Carolina.

The statement earned him a standing ovation at an event in which two protesters were led out. Trump called for "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."

He cited polls as evidence of "hatred" of Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. One was a survey from Pew Research. He didn't include specifics, so it's not clear what the data there really show.

A 2011 Pew Global Attitudes survey found majorities of Muslims in other countries described Westerners as "selfish," "violent," and "arrogant."

The Washington Post's Philip Bump pointed out, citing different Pew data:

"The polling firm has found that Muslims across the globe are overwhelmingly opposedto the Islamic State and in 2007 that Muslims were much less likely to view suicide bombings as justified than five years prior. Pew also found a partisan split in which Republican Americans were far more likely to hold negative views of Muslims than Democrats. In 2011, they learned that U.S. Muslims almost never consider suicide bombings to be justified."

At his rally, Trump then went on to highlight another poll.

"This was from the Center for Security Policy, very highly respected group of people who I know, by the way — 25 percent of those polled agreed violence against Americans is justified. It's Muslims — 25 percent," Trump said.

The poll is highly suspect. Its methodology is questionable — polling online — and its questions in many cases are leading.

There may be a reason for that. While Trump calls the group "highly respected," it's a hawkish, ultra-conservative organization whose website features prominent warnings about the rise of Sharia law in the U.S. and about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrating this country.

"The Muslim Brotherhood agenda for the United States demonstrably seeks through subversive infiltration of American institutions the triumph of shariah," the group's president and founder Frank Gaffney writes on the website about a book he endorsed as part of its "Civilization Jihad Reader Series." He continued, "We are now on notice that U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations is simply the leading edge of the jihadist movement in this country. While the USCMO seeks to cloak itself in red, white, and blue, it is only for the purpose of accomplishing what can aptly be described as 'Star Spangled Shariah.'"

Gaffney is known for alleging the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into the U.S., including Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform. Gaffney even has a petition page set up on his group's website wanting to kick Norquist and Suhail Kahn out of the American Conservative Union and accusing them of "running influence operations against conservatives on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist causes."

Reaction from other GOP presidential hopefuls came quickly. Ben Carson tried to draw this line: "Everyone visiting our country should register and be monitored during their stay as is done in many countries," spokesman Doug Watts said. "We do not and would not advocate being selective on one's religion."

Others all-out rejected Trump's proposal.

Ted Cruz, who is competing with Trump for both the Tea Party and the evangelical vote spoke to NBC News. "No, that is not my policy," he said. "I believe the focus should be on radical Islamic terrorism."

Jeb Bush called Trump "unhinged."

Marco Rubio said Trump's plan was outlandish and offensive.

Chris Christie said Trump has no idea what he's talking about.

Former Vice President **** Cheney was asked about it during an appearance on the Hugh Hewitt Radio program.

"Well, I think this whole nation that we can say, 'No more Muslims,' that we can just ban a whole religion goes against everything we stand for and believe in," he said.

Arab-American civil rights groups, meanwhile, reacted with alarm. Nihad Awad of the Council on American Islamic Relations said Trump sounded like the leader of a lynch mob.

"If such hatred and bigotry is not outright rejected by the GOP, then it will be part of it's legacy for many years to come," Awad said.

Republican Party chairs in two key early primary states, South Carolina and New Hampshire, did outright reject it.

But a co-chairman of Trump's state veterans coalition in New Hampshire defended Trump's statement, arguing that it's the same policy used against Japanese Americans during World War II.

"What he's saying is no different than the situation during World War II, when we put the Japanese in camps," state Rep. Al Baldasaro said, per WMUR's John DiStaso. "The people who attacked innocent people in Paris came through open borders. From a military mind standpoint, all Donald Trump is saying is to do what needs to be done until we get a handle on how to do background checks."

Baldasaro also called on Jennifer Horn, the state party Charwoman to step down for calling Trump's plan "un-American."

"She needs to resign because she has no clue," Baldasaro said. "She's my friend, but I have to separate that from the Republican Party."

As divisive as this policy is, Trump did something else last night — something he always does at his rallies, portay himself as the man to unify the county.

"Wouldn't it be good for all of us to really get together and make out country great again?" Trump asked, invoking his slogan. "Isn't that what we really want to do?"

[nannab]

The only thing that should be banned is this politically correct nonsense.

[Bandit795]

I've found a video of his speech.

 

[Bandit795]

I think Donald Trump is going to take the fall for his insane rantings and that the end result will be another Bush vs Clinton presidential election. Rockefeller is still in complete control of U.S. politics.

[jg1]

I think TRUMP is right. Instead of letting in hundreds of thousands of them now, I think we should hold off until we find out if they are a true threat or not.

If we can not be sure 100% of them are safe, we should not let any in. Remember what just a few did to the trade center. Or 2 of them did in San bernadino. Or 4 of them did in france, ect, ect. They are not a religon of peace. We do not want sharia law here in the states, but thats what they want.  Who's fault will it be when your child dies because of one of them. When do we stop letting them in? When they start beheading people here, how about when they take down another plane.

How do you tell if they are a radical or not. Do you think they will tell you? 

[Shabibilicious]

This must be a very proud moment for the Trump youth.

 

GO RV, then BV

[RV ME]

According to some, the United States has ever excluded groups from immigrating to our Country.   Of course they could not be further from the truth.

 

1875 - The Page Act becomes law. It's the country's first exclusionary act, banning criminals, prostitutes, and Chinese contract laborers from entering the country.

 

1882 - Congress passes the Immigration Act. The law imposes a $.50 tax on new arrivals and bans "convicts (except those convicted of political offenses), lunatics, idiots and persons likely to become public charges" from entering the U.S.  The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 bans "skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining" from entering the country for ten years and denies Chinese immigrants the path to citizenship. Thousands of Chinese immigrants had worked on the construction of the Trans-Continental Railroad, and these workers were left unemployed when the project was complete. The high rate of unemployment and anti-Chinese sentiment led to passage of the law.

 

 

1903 - Congress passes the Anarchist Exclusion Act, which denies anarchists, other political extremists, beggars, and epileptics entry into the U.S. It's the first time individuals are banned from the U.S. based on political beliefs.

 

1907 - The Immigration Act of 1907 broadens the categories of people banned from immigrating to the U.S. The list excludes “imbeciles,” “feeble-minded” people, those with physical or mental disabilities that prevent them from working, tuberculosis victims, children who enter the U.S. without parents, and those who committed crimes of “moral turpitude.”

 

1917 - Immigration Act of 1917, also called Asiatic Barred Zone Act, further restricted immigration, particularly of people from a large swath of Asia and the Pacific Islands. The act also bars homosexuals, “idiots,” “feeble-minded persons,” "criminals," “insane persons,” alcoholics, and other categories. In addition, the act sets a literacy standard for immigrants age 16 and older. They must be able to read a 40-word selection in their native language.

 

1921 - The Emergency Quota Law of 1921 limits the number of immigrants entering the U.S. each year to 350,000 and implements a nationality quota. Immigration from any country is capped at 3% of the population of that nationality based on the 1910 census. The law reduces immigration from eastern and southern Europe while favoring immigrants from Northern Europe.

 

1924 - The National Origins Act reduces the number of immigrants entering the U.S. each year to 165,000 and the nationality quota set forth in the Quota Law of 1921 is cut to 2% of the population of that nationality based on the 1890 census. The quota system did not apply to immigrants from the western hemisphere.

 

1929 - The National Origins Act once again reduces the annual cap on the number of immigrants allowed to enter the U.S., this time to 150,000. The 2% quota is linked to 1920 census data, thereby further limiting the number of immigrants from eastern and southern Europe.

 

1940 - The Alien Registration Act (Smith Act) requires that all immigrants age 14 and up register with the government and be fingerprinted. The act also bans individuals considered “subversives” from immigrating.

 

1952 - Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (the McCarran-Walter Act) consolidates earlier immigration legislation into one law and eliminates race as a basis of exclusion. However, race continues to be a factor because the quota system remains in place, except for immigrants from the western hemisphere. Immigration from any country is capped at 1/6th of 1% of the population of that nationality based on the 1920 census.

 

1965 - The Immigration Act of 1965 gets rid of the nationality quotas, but limits annual immigration from the eastern hemisphere to 170,000, with a limit of 20,000 immigrants per country, and for the first time caps annual immigration from the western hemisphere at 120,000, without the country limit. In addition, a preference system is established for family members of U.S. citizens.

 

1980 - The Refugee Act defines refugees as a person who flees his or her country “on account of race, religion, nationality, or political opinion.” Refugees are considered a different category than immigrants. The president and Congress are granted the authority to establish an annual ceiling on the number of refugees allowed into the U.S. The act also lowers the annual limit of immigrants to 270,000, from 290,000.

 

http://www.infoplease.com/us/immigration/legislation-timeline.html

 

 

  As I see it, the current Syrians are not fleeing because of “race, religion, nationality, or political opinion” so why would they count as refugees under our law?  All of these laws were passed by Congress, not implemented by executive order. Perhaps Trump should have said we need to ban immigration from anyone originating from the ME countries instead of all muslims, but it is not like we have never done anything like that before.  RV ME  

 

[Shabibilicious]

  As I see it, the current Syrians are not fleeing because of “race, religion, nationality, or political opinion” so why would they count as refugees under our law?  All of these laws were passed by Congress, not implemented by executive order. Perhaps Trump should have said we need to ban immigration from anyone originating from the ME countries instead of all muslims, but it is not like we have never done anything like that before.  RV ME  

 

Middle Eastern (categorized as "white"),  Muslim (moderates, not hardliners....think Presbyterian compared to Westboro Baptist) Syrian (citizens of a repressed regime who could be killed for their political opinion).  As I see it they've covered all the bases........I admit, "white" ,though true, is a stretch being that all Middle Easterners are categorized as such.  Therefore that analogy is somewhat moot.  As always, just my opinion and spin.    

 

GO RV, then BV

[Barbara020548]

I totally DISAGREE Mr. Trump. 

I spoke to a predominately African-American audience on the radio this morning, after hearing Mr. Trump's comments.  I have not spoken on any type of media, since my civil rights activist days in the sixties through the early seventies.

 

There were a number of African Americans expressing... MAYBE WE SHOULD LISTEN to Mr. Trump.  My response to them were...if we as a group go along with this type of NONSENSE, APARTIED, NAZISM and JIM CROWISM...WE will be the next GROUP on that/his list banned from this country... and if WE are force to leave OUR country, where are we going to go...DON'T give me this crap about going back to AFRICA...We don't know any thing about Africa and the majority of us would NOT survive... in addition, we have been marginalized in this country, since the era of slavery to the present...I attempted leave this message with them...that we are AMERICANS first and period...we have a CONSTITUTION...Mr. Trump's proposal is UN-CONSTITUTIONAL...IF this is allowed to happen to the MUSLINS and Muslin Americans...we as Africans, Hispanics, Asians, Natives and other Americans is just a "stones throw" away from it happening to us.

[jg1]

I totally DISAGREE Mr. Trump.

I spoke to a predominately African-American audience on the radio this morning, after hearing Mr. Trump's comments. I have not spoken on any type of media, since my civil rights activist days in the sixties through the early seventies.

There were a number of African Americans expressing... MAYBE WE SHOULD LISTEN to Mr. Trump. My response to them were...if we as a group go along with this type of NONSENSE, APARTIED, NAZISM and JIM CROWISM...WE will be the next GROUP on that/his list banned from this country... and if WE are force to leave OUR country, where are we going to go...DON'T give me this crap about going back to AFRICA...We don't know any thing about Africa and the majority of us would NOT survive... in addition, we have been marginalized in this country, since the era of slavery to the present...I attempted leave this message with them...that we are AMERICANS first and period...we have a CONSTITUTION...Mr. Trump's proposal is UN-CONSTITUTIONAL...IF this is allowed to happen to the MUSLINS and Muslin Americans...we as Africans, Hispanics, Asians, Natives and other Americans is just a "stones throw" away from it happening to us.

Ok just ban people who go buy a book that states kill the infidels. And I don't see any Muslims that were complaining before Or pointing out that extremist Muslims are wrong But now they are complaining When we are ready to keep out Extremist Muslims. We are at war, keep more from entering until we know they are not going to blow us up. How can you tell if a Muslim is an extremist, I say for now Let's play it safe

[dog53]

I totally DISAGREE Mr. Trump. 

I spoke to a predominately African-American audience on the radio this morning, after hearing Mr. Trump's comments.  I have not spoken on any type of media, since my civil rights activist days in the sixties through the early seventies.

 

There were a number of African Americans expressing... MAYBE WE SHOULD LISTEN to Mr. Trump.  My response to them were...if we as a group go along with this type of NONSENSE, APARTIED, NAZISM and JIM CROWISM...WE will be the next GROUP on that/his list banned from this country... and if WE are force to leave OUR country, where are we going to go...DON'T give me this crap about going back to AFRICA...We don't know any thing about Africa and the majority of us would NOT survive... in addition, we have been marginalized in this country, since the era of slavery to the present...I attempted leave this message with them...that we are AMERICANS first and period...we have a CONSTITUTION...Mr. Trump's proposal is UN-CONSTITUTIONAL...IF this is allowed to happen to the MUSLINS and Muslin Americans...we as Africans, Hispanics, Asians, Natives and other Americans is just a "stones throw" away from it happening to us.

 

 

Maybe you could make room for them at your house ? 

Oh and by the way Hispanics, Asians, Natives and other Americans  are not on a daily basis trying to kill us.

Do I agree with trump    NO of course not

Do I agree with your drivel   NO of course not. 

 

Do I think that every muslim in this country needs to be look at.

 

Oh hell yes.

and when they pass the smell test.

Hey  welcome to america 

[Bandit795]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/07/donald-trump-loves-muslims-if-they-re-rich.html?source=TDB&via=FB_Page

 

 

Trump Only Loves Rich Muslims Who Give Him Money

They’re mostly in the Gulf, and they have a ton of money, and they’re sending some of it The Donald’s way. But what else are they up to?

Donald Trump clearly has issues with Muslims. The latest example is his vow to ban all Muslim immigration to the United States, declaring he wants a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” Before that Trump had called for depriving American Muslims of civil liberties simply because of their faith by way of warrantless surveillance of Muslim Americans. And he has even gone as far as to indict all Muslims by declaring recently that “worldwide the Muslims were absolutely going wild” cheering on the 9/11 attacks.

But there’s one type of Muslim Trump really loves: The ones that make him big bucks. You see, if a Muslim can show Trump the money, then all those concerns he has with Muslims go right out the window of his private jet as he jets off to the Gulf to cash in.

For example, Trump loves Hussain Sajwani, head of the Dubai luxury real estate company Damac Properties. Trump has called the Muslim Sajwani a “good friend” and a “great man,” among other accolades. And in May 2014, The Donald even flew off to Dubai to spend time with his Muslim friend as they announced the massive real estate project they were teaming up to create in the United Arab Emirates.

And when I say massive project, I mean Trump-style “yuge!”  This 42-million square foot development (the Pentagon is 6-million square feet) includes 104 villas and mansions that begin at more than $1 million U.S. dollars and climb to over $10 million a pop. The development also boasts the “Trump World Golf Club,” which Trump has described as a course that “will be bigger and better and stronger” than any other in the region. Interestingly, Trump has used almost identical words to describe how the U.S. military will look if he’s elected.

The native Americans should've done that with all Europeans back then....

 

Maybe you could make room for them at your house ? 

Oh and by the way Hispanics, Asians, Natives and other Americans  are not on a daily basis trying to kill us.

Do I agree with trump    NO of course not

Do I agree with your drivel   NO of course not. 

 

Do I think that every muslim in this country needs to be look at.

 

Oh hell yes.

and when they pass the smell test.

Hey  welcome to america 

[RV ME]

I totally DISAGREE Mr. Trump. 

I spoke to a predominately African-American audience on the radio this morning, after hearing Mr. Trump's comments.  I have not spoken on any type of media, since my civil rights activist days in the sixties through the early seventies.

 

There were a number of African Americans expressing... MAYBE WE SHOULD LISTEN to Mr. Trump.  My response to them were...if we as a group go along with this type of NONSENSE, APARTIED, NAZISM and JIM CROWISM...WE will be the next GROUP on that/his list banned from this country... and if WE are force to leave OUR country, where are we going to go...DON'T give me this crap about going back to AFRICA...We don't know any thing about Africa and the majority of us would NOT survive... in addition, we have been marginalized in this country, since the era of slavery to the present...I attempted leave this message with them...that we are AMERICANS first and period...we have a CONSTITUTION...Mr. Trump's proposal is UN-CONSTITUTIONAL...IF this is allowed to happen to the MUSLINS and Muslin Americans...we as Africans, Hispanics, Asians, Natives and other Americans is just a "stones throw" away from it happening to us.

 

You do realize that stopping immigration from a specific group or area is not the same as throwing people out of the country.  If not, now you do.  If you do know, how do you make the leap from halting non-citizens from entering the country to throwing citizens out?  Appears to me that you either believe the anti-Trump propaganda or are trying to be part of same.

 

Middle Eastern (categorized as "white"),  Muslim (moderates, not hardliners....think Presbyterian compared to Westboro Baptist) Syrian (citizens of a repressed regime who could be killed for their political opinion).  As I see it they've covered all the bases........I admit, "white" ,though true, is a stretch being that all Middle Easterners are categorized as such.  Therefore that analogy is somewhat moot.  As always, just my opinion and spin.    

 

GO RV, then BV

 

Several of the changes cited above were to limit certain groups of whites.  Italians, Irish, Eastern Europeans were all limited at one time or another.  With the Syrians, refugee is hard to confirm.  It has been reported that of the thousands of Syrians already allowed in 0.4% have been Christian, and that group would clearly be categorized as refugee by definition.  What I heard Trump say was stop muslims from entering “until  we can figure out what’s going on”.  Since the government has said there is no way to vet these refugees, I do not see a problem with limiting immigration like we have done many times before until we can make sure those coming in are not Perverted Islamic Terrorists.

 

The bigger picture I took after looking this up was that after 133 years of banning “lunatics, idiots, imbeciles, and insane persons” we still ended up with the government we have today

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

***///

 

Can anyone tell US why hobummer won't allow Christians from the ME into The US...?

 

...and BTW, if our gubment agencies responsible for 'immigration' can't weed out a potential

terrorist from a radicalized madrassa in Pakistan on a false-intent 'marriage' visa,

how can we hope they'll weed out all her other radical islamist brotherhood terrorist pals?

 

oh, wait, those are hobummer's pals, too... guess he doesn't wanna keep them out, huh....

[Shabibilicious]

Perhaps Donald should travel to the Middle East and deliver his message personally.....face to face.  

 

GO RV, then BV

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

***///

 

Why should he, SHABS... when he's already doing exactly that right here on US soil already....

 

or are you also in denial about how many are already here, entrenched and waiting....?

[Shabibilicious]

***///

 

Why should he, SHABS... when he's already doing exactly that right here on US soil already....

 

or are you also in denial about how many are already here, entrenched and waiting....?

 

You got an accurate number?....deniers want to know.       And Donald should travel there to prove his enormous b@lls actually exist.....Carson made the trip.  

 

GO RV, then BV

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

***///

Number...?  well hobummer's own administration claims tracking over 400 'active' here now...

and that's only the ones they'll admit to....  but isn't ONE too many for you...?

 

hobummer goes over there, climbs into bed with the evil iranians and accomplishes nothing more

than his own brand of terrorism against US in doing so...

 

Trump doesn't have to go to the game to know what the score is....

[Shabibilicious]

He could go if he wanted to though......or have Americans been banned from entering the Middle East?    

 

GO RV, then BV

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

....or have Americans been banned from entering the Middle East?    

 

***///

 

Let's see now... iranians say "death to America"...

many of the Iraqi's wanted US out of there...

ASSad said we'd better not cross that line in the sand in Syria....

Afghanistan & their radical pals in Pakistan want US all dead n' gone...

boko haram say's stay the hell out of hobummer's homeland in Africa or else....   sooooo..... 

[Barbara020548]

Senior Member_8,323 post

 

You have always made respectful comments on my post before and I strongly feel that has not changed. You and I tend to respectfully agree to disagree.

 

I am not saying that suspected terrorist should not be vetted, they should be and THROUGHLY.  However, suspected terrorist or not ALWAYS Muslins. 

 

There are Muslin Americans that love this country.  Federally and state law enforcement's tips/information on various terrorist activities comes from Muslin-American communities, because they are Americans first and being Muslin is their faith. 

 

It is ironic, today Mr. trump said HIS Muslin friends and business associates would be exempt from this banning policy.

[DinarMillionaire]

Hey Barbara...Are Muslins another offshoot of Muslims?...It's hard for me to keep up with all the factions of Terror groups.

[pattyangel]

I don't understand the ruckus about banning Muslims until our representatives can figure out what is going on.  Are some just reading what they want to read "ban all Muslims"  or did Trump say "all Muslims" or did the media interpret this themselves. 

 

We have to make this country safe by all means.  If it means taking our time in screening all who enters this Nation then so be it.  I would rather be safe than sorry, then to shed a tear for a love one that loses their lives because of that one ISIS that passed through our weak security process.  Why the urgency of so many as one time.  As a born American, how much more can they take from us to support these immigrants. 

 

The security of our Country is a priority, the security of our families is our priority.  Why is that so hard to comprehend.

 

Let's identify our enemies and oust them. 

[Flash101]

jg1 News Flash we have that sierra law here in Michigan for some time now many years Dearborn Michigan we call it  little Iraq now.

 

101