Trump Calls for Ban on All Muslims Entering US

[Shadow Wolf]

And what other way are you suggesting. Visa maybe?

Pretty much anything that does not involve sending people back to were they risk legal troubles, religious persecution, gender/minority oppression, and many of them their very lives. The Syrian refugees just aren't tired, hungry, huddles masses yearning to be free, they are running for their lives.
Or are you asking what other ways terrorists can sneak in? Visas are probably easier, given they aren't a part of a UN program like the UNHRC. Even for those who were putting their lives on the line because they translated for American troops are having to wait, sometimes for years, going through official refugee asylum-seeking routes. Or they could sneak in as tourists, which is even quicker and easier.

 

[esmith]

Pretty much anything that does not involve sending people back to were they risk legal troubles, religious persecution, gender/minority oppression, and many of them their very lives. The Syrian refugees just aren't tired, hungry, huddles masses yearning to be free, they are running for their lives.
Or are you asking what other ways terrorists can sneak in? Visas are probably easier, given they aren't a part of a UN program like the UNHRC. Even for those who were putting their lives on the line because they translated for American troops are having to wait, sometimes for years, going through official refugee asylum-seeking routes. Or they could sneak in as tourists, which is even quicker and easier.

I was asking what you see as an easier way to gain entry into the country.
So, basically you are saying that our Visa program is full of holes. Well I guess you are probably right, look at the latest example. So you would not object to a drastic overhaul of the Visa program.
So, it appears that terrorist can get into the US in many different ways. Forged Passports and Visas, the sale of legitimate passports and visas, sneaking across borders, brought in as a fiance/spouse (false information), and a couple I have no idea about. So, it appears that if terrorist from another country, let again "home grown", want to do us harm we are SOL. Doesn't give one a warm comfy feeling does it. This is probably why so many, at first look, supports Trumps unworkable idea.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I was asking what you see as an easier way to gain entry into the country.
So, basically you are saying that our Visa program is full of holes. Well I guess you are probably right, look at the latest example. So you would not object to a drastic overhaul of the Visa program.
So, it appears that terrorist can get into the US in many different ways. Forged Passports and Visas, the sale of legitimate passports and visas, sneaking across borders, brought in as a fiance/spouse (false information), and a couple I have no idea about. So, it appears that if terrorist from another country, let again "home grown", want to do us harm we are SOL. Doesn't give one a warm comfy feeling does it. This is probably why so many, at first look, supports Trumps unworkable idea.

It's better to look at their plans of attacks. They actually don't really make plans for attacking America with their own people. Rather the are trying to get lone operatives who aren't really connected but are drawn in anyways to do their work for them. It seems to be an over-estimation on their part on how many people support them, especially in the West, but then again it's very normal for someone doing something unusual (for good or bad) to assume more people are doing it. They may try and sneak across the boarder, but that is a dangerous trip and largely contingent upon having people who can help you make it, so it's unlikely they would take the same routes traveled by undocumented Central and Southern Americans, and it's a valid question of if they would have the knowledge and ability to survive in the forest that would be required for sneaking in from the Canadian border.
We really can't do much other than watch who is coming into the country, and watch where people go when they leave, and remain vigilant of domestic terrorists (but with less profiling and assumptions, because Christians, Jews, animal/environmentalists, and deranged loners still pose a greater domestic threat).

 

[esmith]

It's better to look at their plans of attacks. They actually don't really make plans for attacking America with their own people. Rather the are trying to get lone operatives who aren't really connected but are drawn in anyways to do their work for them. It seems to be an over-estimation on their part on how many people support them, especially in the West, but then again it's very normal for someone doing something unusual (for good or bad) to assume more people are doing it. They may try and sneak across the boarder, but that is a dangerous trip and largely contingent upon having people who can help you make it, so it's unlikely they would take the same routes traveled by undocumented Central and Southern Americans, and it's a valid question of if they would have the knowledge and ability to survive in the forest that would be required for sneaking in from the Canadian border.
We really can't do much other than watch who is coming into the country, and watch where people go when they leave, and remain vigilant of domestic terrorists (but with less profiling and assumptions, because Christians, Jews, animal/environmentalists, and deranged loners still pose a greater domestic threat).

Yes, but since this is a thread on Trump's non-Muslim policy I was just suggesting that in the wake of the latest terrorist act that it was possible that some people could agree with him, even though it is unworkable. I think the majority of what Trump says is his, or his campaign staff idea to get, basically, free publicity. The media is constantly quoting him and inviting him on various shows and he is receiving more media attention than even Hillary, (whether good or bad it's still attention).

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I was just suggesting that in the wake of the latest terrorist act that it was possible that some people could agree with him, even though it is unworkable.

The recent attack was a domestic attack. The guy was born here, and even though his wife wasn't, it adds weight to the position that banning Muslims from coming in won't work because this attack involved domestic operatives.

 

[tytlyf]

ISIL is already here and has been for years. They'll gain new members this month from radicalization through the internet in the states.
There's no reason to break American traditional values concerning refugees.

Republicans whine that Obama insulted ISIL by calling them a "JV Team."
Republicans whine that Obama isn't afraid of refugees

 

[esmith]

The recent attack was a domestic attack. The guy was born here, and even though his wife wasn't, it adds weight to the position that banning Muslims from coming in won't work because this attack involved domestic operatives.

Past how about future. The FBI suspect that this couple was corresponding to terrorist cells within the country; just hasn't found them yet.

 

[esmith]

ISIL is already here and has been for years. They'll gain new members this month from radicalization through the internet in the states.
There's no reason to break American traditional values concerning refugees.

Republicans whine that Obama insulted ISIL by calling them a "JV Team."
Republicans whine that Obama isn't afraid of refugees

Hmmmm, think you got it a little wrong. The "Republicans " said that Obama didn't understand the threat that ISIS was projecting around the world and he considered them a "minor"/"JV" team vice the threat they actually posed.. No one but certain "liberal's" think that you can make ISIS more threatening by "insulting" them.
On your other point, I think that you again are reading something into something that isn't there. Those that have concerns about refugees is not the "threat" that all refugees pose only the possibility that terrorist could enter the country posing as refugees.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Past how about future. The FBI suspect that this couple was corresponding to terrorist cells within the country; just hasn't found them yet.

Meaning Trumps call to ban Muslims from entering is a claim that is unfounded making it entirely unnecessary to enact such a policy. Groups like ISIS aren't making it a goal to get people here for attacks. For that they are counting on our fear and hatred of Islam and Muslims to motivate people to do the attacks for them. We may even see a rise in Muslims carrying out mass shootings in a way we see some bullied and emotionally troubled kids shoot up their school (or work, as has recently been on the news). Maybe we won't, but we can look at history and see that even the Provisional-IRA had success with preying upon the minds of the marginalized.

 

[ShivaFan]

The "Malala Effect" has definetly contributed to a "phase shift" in the campaign of the nationalist right-wing via favorites Trump and Cruz (do not count Rubio among this anti-establishment effort, he is the now defacto establishment candidate now that Bush is toast, but Rubio's decline from top tier began last week when the establishment operatives and "neo-cons" of FOX News essentially endorsed Rubio so he will now be rejected by the polarity of the Republican base and the establishment will turn to Christie next as "their guy" - you will see this as the effort for Christie moves into the battle fronts of Michigan, Vermont, New Jersey, Florida, Ohio. They have no chance in California which is going to go to Trump, and Trump will probably take Florida if the establishment continues for Ruhio where Rubio will lose his own home state and that will be the end of him. So watch the establishment do a play for Christie now and tell us how he is the "adult in the room", there will be phony "focus groups" trying to act like they are representative of something and "have now changed their vote to Christie" and such nonsense.

A lot of this is driven by the "neo-cons", there is open war now between the neo-cons who are pin-point interventionists verse the nationalists who didn't like the outcome of the Bush policy and are not interested in removing dictators or establishing neo-conservative governments in foreign lands but simply will bomb and "kill them all" WW2 style then "get out" and let them keep their dictators and more importantly secure the homeland by strong vetting proccesses. The nationalists are also ready to sit down with Putin, so the neo-cons will attack them as communists or something.

Certainly there was nothing wrong with Trump having a bit of play on words to lock in votes from the popular fronts regarding the ban on Muslims, actually he never actually said that nor intends to do that, he wants a moratorium on Muslims coming in from six known hotbeds of Islamic extremism abroad but there are a lot of Americans who are ignorant of geography and might get confused if information given to them to win votes and to "set the enthusiasm" is "too complicated" so the idea is the "keep it simple" because in this war between the neo-cons and the nationalists is serious and the consequences of the end-result too great to get bogged down with Perot style "charts and graphs" and numbers and those things that waste too much time since there are only 10 months left.

However, it may be the anti-establishment went a bit too overboard with this while trying to "keep it simple", because Malala has come out criticising Trump. She doesn't understand what Trump is actually going to do, besides his maybe even saving her life as she is one of the top ten targets of the Islamic extremists besides the Saudi Royal family, the Pope, Putin - she is right up there with them.

In retrospect, we are now seeing the clarifications need to be made because the fact of the matter is, Malala is also beloved by the polarity of the Republican base and has been for a couple of years now. There is no 100% among any crowd, but she has been and is beloved by most of the base. In the heat of "battle" adrenaline rises and can sometimes cause one to live "only in the moment" and totally forget about Malala for example, which can have embarrassing "oh ohs, didn't think about that" moments.

But none of this changes the overall idea that the current vetting process sucks and needs to be overdone and include profiling. It is also clear, we see clarfication now being made and of course we cannot insult Malala without losing Republican votes, she has an "above average" following among Republican voters who see her as a hero in the battle agaunst Radical Islam. So thus the clarifications, but no apology. Hopefully Malala will get onboard, definetly there are requests to discuss the matter.

That being said, I went over the State primaries, and it looks like Trump will win the nomination with Cruz close behind. Cruz has the evangelical vote, but that is overrated even if an Iowa factor, we will see Christie bump up in some northern states but not win, Rubio will be in decline now, after California goes to Trump that will be the end. There is a bit of "lull time" after the early states and that is when the money will dry up for the establishment first choices and will shift to Christie but the establishment is toast after the recent Republican Paul Ryan omni-"bust" budget, so they gave just put the final nail in their own coffin as far as the base is concerned.

 

[Agathion]

I support trump's (TEMPORARY) ban of Muslims. And yes he means a temporary one, not an eternal one. Anyone who says otherwise is either deaf and did not hear trump when he said temporary or they are purposely lying and putting words in trump's mouth that he never spoke.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I support trump's (TEMPORARY) ban of Muslims. And yes he means a temporary one, not an eternal one. Anyone who says otherwise is either deaf and did not hear trump when he said temporary or they are purposely lying and putting words in trump's mouth that he never spoke.

That, or he doesn't know what the word Muslim means. What about tourist Muslims, American Muslims coming back from outside, business men supporting USA, expat doctors and teachers, etc?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I support trump's (TEMPORARY) ban of Muslims. And yes he means a temporary one, not an eternal one. Anyone who says otherwise is either deaf and did not hear trump when he said temporary or they are purposely lying and putting words in trump's mouth that he never spoke.

Sure thing. We'll keep all of those wanting to study or teach in our universities out, well not allow any of them wanting to work in our hospitals in, well bar those from wanting to research in our facilities, and well tell refugees running for their lives tough ****.

 

[columbus]

I support trump's (TEMPORARY) ban of Muslims.

What does "TEMPORARY" actually mean, precisely? Until the Saudi royals pitch a fit? Indian government officials are banned, if they are Muslim? Are they allowed to get to the UN building in NYC.
How does Trump plan to distinguish nonMuslims from Muslim majority countries from actual Muslims? Why would he want to keep out Smart Guy?

How does it improve USA security to bann people based upon religious beliefs? How can this be anything more important than a schmuck of a politician trying to raise his popularity by stepping on fundamental US values?
Tom

 

[Smart_Guy]

How does Trump plan to distinguish nonMuslims from Muslim majority countries from actual Muslims? Why would he want to keep out Smart Guy?

I'll wear a cap, shave my beard and speak American English. They will never know

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'll wear a cap, shave my beard and speak American English. They will never know

Make sure the cap has an American flag on it, and if you really want to pass wear a NASCAR t-shirt, blue jeans, and sneakers.

 

[columbus]

I'll wear a cap, shave my beard and speak American English. They will never know

Shadow Wolf has it down.
The way you look in your avatar is perfect. Put on some US style clothes and you're in!
Tom

 

[Smart_Guy]

Make sure the cap has an American flag on it, and if you really want to pass wear a NASCAR t-shirt, blue jeans, and sneakers.

Shadow Wolf has it down.
The way you look in your avatar is perfect. Put on some US style clothes and you're in!
Tom

Should I use the F word more often too?

 

[Underhill]

I'll wear a cap, shave my beard and speak American English. They will never know

You bring up a legitimate point however. Are they going to start background checks based upon religion? Or just ban people from certain countries? 2/3rds of all Americans from the middle east are christians, so that may backfire.

I don't see it happening either way. There is too much money and influence in the middle east for either of those things to pass muster. Not to mention colleges across the country would lose a substantial number of students.

 

[Agathion]

Even if trump gets elected the likelyhood he would be allowed to actually ban muslims is low. If he becomes the president then he will have to abide by the rules and laws of the govt. He will be subject to the constitution and further will be subject to scrutiny from the people. He will not be able to do whatever the hell he wants and if he wishes to keep his presidency he will have to keep the people happy. Trump is above all else a pragmatist... if the vast majority of the american population do not support his muslim ban then he will prob drop it. To do anything else would jeopardize his position and power.