Why Trump's Muslim ban resonates

American_Jihad

Flaming Libs/Koranimals
May 1, 2012
11,534
3,715
350
Gulf of Mex 26.609, -82.220
Presidents past did the same and worse, just look at Obama's crap...

Who’s The Crazy One?

Why Trump's Muslim ban resonates.
December 10, 2015
David Horowitz

dt.jpg


Presidential candidate Donald Trump has called for a moratorium on Muslim immigration until we can figure out why Islamic terrorists have been able to enter our country and devised ways to protect ourselves. This has caused the left and right establishments to dogpile on Trump. Echoing the sentiments of virtually all Democrats and many Republicans, a Washington Post editorial has declared that Trump’s proposal disqualifies him as a candidate because in the Post’s view what he recommends is unconstitutional and therefore un-American. But President Obama has issued executive orders – as it happens orders that sabotage our borders - that he himself has called unconstitutional (“I don’t have the authority to stop deportations”). Has the Post editorialized that this is un-American and disqualifies him for the presidency? Has it called for Obama to be impeached? Have Democrats ridiculed Obama for his un-American prescriptions?

Consider the nature of the threat. A 2009 “World Opinion” survey by the University of Maryland showed that between 30 and 50% of Muslims in Jordan, Egypt and other Islamic countries approved of the terrorist attacks on America and that only a minority of Muslims “entirely disapproved” of them. ISIS has acknowledged its plans to use refugee programs to infiltrate its terrorists into the United States and other infidel countries. In Minneapolis we have a Somali refugee community many of whose members have returned to Syria to fight for ISIS. Other Muslim immigrants like Major Hassan and Tashfeen Malik have carried out barbaric acts of terror here at home. Today Muslim terrorists are using assault rifles and pipe bombs, but we know they have Sarin gas and other chemical weapons which they might use tomorrow. The terrorists inexorably arrive along with the other immigrants, no one in authority apparently knowing who’s who. Who, then, in his right mind does not think that Muslim immigration poses a serious security threat to us?

The outrage against Trump should properly have been directed at our president who refuses to identify the enemy as Islamic terrorism, who has opened the door to nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to the Islamic America-haters in Iran, whose policies have created the vacuums that ISIS has filled, and who even after Paris and San Bernardino is determined to bring 100,000 immigrants from Syrian war zones to our unprotected shores. This outrage is missing and it is precisely because it is missing that Trump’s unconstitutional proposal resonates with so many rightly concerned Americans. When the man in charge of our security is by general consensus out to lunch in regard to fighting the war on Islamic terror, or protecting us at home, a proposal like Trump’s, which at least recognizes the threat, is going to resonate with the public.

In middle of a crisis of national security, the Democratic Party seems to think that climate change and especially gun ownership are greater threats to our survival than the one that comes from hundreds of millions of Muslims who think America should be attacked and who believe the whole world should be put under medieval Islamic law. In the face of this threat, the Democratic Party and its leaders seem to have no problem with the fact that we have more than 350 “Sanctuary Cities” that are dedicated to sabotaging our immigration laws; that we have no southern border and as a result have 179,000 illegal alien criminals and who knows how many terrorists in our country today.

...

Donald Trump’s great contribution is saying the unsayable; putting things on the table that would otherwise be buried; calling a spade a spade in a time when political correctness has made us unable to discuss things that have to do with our basic national survival. This is the crux of the issue. Every time he creates a controversy like this he also tells this country that its emperors, Republican and Democrat, have no clothes. That they prefer propriety over defending the country. That they are dedicated only to keeping the lid on a cauldron of threat and challenge they have allowed to boil over.

The 2016 election will be a referendum on the defense of this country and its survival. Let’s see who answers the call.

Who’s The Crazy One?
 
Isn't it funny how the media and libtards shit themselves straining so hard to demonize Trump.....just to realize he ends up being accurate and right?

Yes. We've banned people from Muslim nations before and it's time to do so again.
 
Trump is the only sane candidate in the race, with the possible exception of Cruz (who I wish would step up to the plate).
 
1 in 5 Democrats Support Trump Muslim Ban
That Overton Window, it's opening.
December 10, 2015
Daniel Greenfield

ht_malik_farook_airport_bugged_bg_lf_151206_4x3_992_1.jpg


The media orgy of hysteria, which included promoting an online anti-Trump poll, getting every single figure of any note to attack him over his proposal for a moratorium on Muslim migration to America from former Nation of Islam member Muhammad Ali to FDR's granddaughter (talk about desperation), has one minor problem with it.

Well two.

The professional Republican political class has to bite down on a poll showing 64 percent of Republicans favor the ban. 52 percent of them strongly favor it.

And around 18 percent of Democrats do as well. The majority of course are following the MSNBC herd signals and are opposed.

37 percent of GOP voters say it makes them more likely to vote Trump. Which is why he did it. 6 percent of Dem voters say it makes them more likely to vote Trump.

In the NBC/WSJ poll, it's a much more narrow split among Republicans. A Rasmussen poll showed

...

1 in 5 Democrats Support Trump Muslim Ban
 
Presidents past did the same and worse, just look at Obama's crap...

Who’s The Crazy One?

Why Trump's Muslim ban resonates.
December 10, 2015
David Horowitz

dt.jpg


Presidential candidate Donald Trump has called for a moratorium on Muslim immigration until we can figure out why Islamic terrorists have been able to enter our country and devised ways to protect ourselves. This has caused the left and right establishments to dogpile on Trump. Echoing the sentiments of virtually all Democrats and many Republicans, a Washington Post editorial has declared that Trump’s proposal disqualifies him as a candidate because in the Post’s view what he recommends is unconstitutional and therefore un-American. But President Obama has issued executive orders – as it happens orders that sabotage our borders - that he himself has called unconstitutional (“I don’t have the authority to stop deportations”). Has the Post editorialized that this is un-American and disqualifies him for the presidency? Has it called for Obama to be impeached? Have Democrats ridiculed Obama for his un-American prescriptions?

Consider the nature of the threat. A 2009 “World Opinion” survey by the University of Maryland showed that between 30 and 50% of Muslims in Jordan, Egypt and other Islamic countries approved of the terrorist attacks on America and that only a minority of Muslims “entirely disapproved” of them. ISIS has acknowledged its plans to use refugee programs to infiltrate its terrorists into the United States and other infidel countries. In Minneapolis we have a Somali refugee community many of whose members have returned to Syria to fight for ISIS. Other Muslim immigrants like Major Hassan and Tashfeen Malik have carried out barbaric acts of terror here at home. Today Muslim terrorists are using assault rifles and pipe bombs, but we know they have Sarin gas and other chemical weapons which they might use tomorrow. The terrorists inexorably arrive along with the other immigrants, no one in authority apparently knowing who’s who. Who, then, in his right mind does not think that Muslim immigration poses a serious security threat to us?

The outrage against Trump should properly have been directed at our president who refuses to identify the enemy as Islamic terrorism, who has opened the door to nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to the Islamic America-haters in Iran, whose policies have created the vacuums that ISIS has filled, and who even after Paris and San Bernardino is determined to bring 100,000 immigrants from Syrian war zones to our unprotected shores. This outrage is missing and it is precisely because it is missing that Trump’s unconstitutional proposal resonates with so many rightly concerned Americans. When the man in charge of our security is by general consensus out to lunch in regard to fighting the war on Islamic terror, or protecting us at home, a proposal like Trump’s, which at least recognizes the threat, is going to resonate with the public.

In middle of a crisis of national security, the Democratic Party seems to think that climate change and especially gun ownership are greater threats to our survival than the one that comes from hundreds of millions of Muslims who think America should be attacked and who believe the whole world should be put under medieval Islamic law. In the face of this threat, the Democratic Party and its leaders seem to have no problem with the fact that we have more than 350 “Sanctuary Cities” that are dedicated to sabotaging our immigration laws; that we have no southern border and as a result have 179,000 illegal alien criminals and who knows how many terrorists in our country today.

...

Donald Trump’s great contribution is saying the unsayable; putting things on the table that would otherwise be buried; calling a spade a spade in a time when political correctness has made us unable to discuss things that have to do with our basic national survival. This is the crux of the issue. Every time he creates a controversy like this he also tells this country that its emperors, Republican and Democrat, have no clothes. That they prefer propriety over defending the country. That they are dedicated only to keeping the lid on a cauldron of threat and challenge they have allowed to boil over.

The 2016 election will be a referendum on the defense of this country and its survival. Let’s see who answers the call.

Who’s The Crazy One?

It resonates because it common sense.

53% of Americans don't want them here and Obama is ignoring the will of the people.

His primary role as POTUS is keeping America safe. How many jihadists will be hiding among those refugees???
 
Columnist Katie Hopkins has defended Donald Trump's controversial claim that police fear "radicalised" parts of London - and revealed her own family want her to leave the capital.

The outspoken columnist claimed those who dismissed the Republican Presidential candidate's remarks - including the Met Police and Boris Johnson - were wrong.

Mr Trump said: "We have places in London and other places that are so radicalised that the police are afraid for their own lives."


The comments sparked outrage from politicians across all sides and a petition calling for him to be banned from the UK is nearing 300,000 signatures.

donaldtrump.jpg

Donald Trump holds Pearl Harbor Day rally at USS Yorktown


Writing in the Daily Mail, she said: “There is fear among the police AND the public.

“In part we ARE a radicalised nation and it does nobody any favours to deny the obvious.

“I work with a team of cameramen in town who text their wives and partners on the hour to confirm they are safe.
Katie Hopkins: Donald Trump is right about 'radicalised' London
 
Trump’s Muslim Ban and Constitutional Legality
There is no ambiguity in the law and it leaves no room for doubt.
December 14, 2015
Ari Lieberman

lp.jpg


On December 7, Republican presidential candidate Donald 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.” The announcement came on the heels of the San Bernardino massacre committed by two Muslim extremists one of whom was a citizen of Pakistan who entered the United States on a K-1 (fiancée) visa.

While Trump’s announcement received support from several quarters of the American public and conservative media, it drew immediate condemnation from many on both the Left and the Right -- with some even questioning the constitutionality of such legislation. White House Spokesman Josh Earnest let loose with a torrent of pejoratives directed at Trump, taking aim at his “fake hair” and stated that his position “disqualifies him from serving as president.” Hillary Clinton, who stands to gain most by seeing Trump surge in Republican polls, echoed those sentiments, noting that Trump’s comments were “shameful,” “wrong,” and “dangerous.”

Numerous Republicans too expressed outrage. House Speaker Paul Ryan denounced Trump in rather harsh terms noting that Trump’s position does not reflect the ideals of the Republican Party. Republican presidential candidate Lindsey Graham said he was “disgusted” by Trump’s comments and urged his party to “tell Donald Trump to go to hell.”

Regardless of whether one agrees with Trump’s blanket Muslim ban or not – and I do not – there is no doubt that from a legal perspective, Trump is on solid footing and is empowered to enact such restrictions under federal law by virtue of Title 8 of the United States Code. 8 USC §1182(f) states in relevant part:

“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants…”

There is no ambiguity in the law and it leaves no room for doubt. If the Commander in Chief recognizes or perceives a danger, he may act in a manner consistent with Trump’s December 7thproclamation. Moreover, there is ample precedent for such action. On April 7, 1980, in response to the Iran hostage saga, Jimmy Carter issued a similar ban on the issuance of visas to Iranian nationals.

However, there was no similar indignation or public outcry when Carter issued his ban on Iranian nationals as Trump has experienced. More importantly, it was Obama’s lax attitude toward border control and failure to properly prioritize national security threats that has compelled contemplation of such drastic action. Anger and frustration should be properly directed not at Trump’s comments but at a president who was responsible for allowing our borders to become porous, who maintained a grossly lax immigration policy and who identified “climate change” — and not ISIS or a nuclear Iran or a resurgent Russia and China — as our nation’s top national security threat.

...

In the meantime, while Trump has been vociferously criticized for making comments that some view as being antithetical to America’s sense of values and harmful to America’s interests, he should at least be given credit for raising a serious national security issue that compels action and warrants redress. And his Muslim ban, whatever one thinks of it, is on sound and legitimate footing within the U.S. legal framework.

Trump’s Muslim Ban and Constitutional Legality
 
Democrats Try to Outlaw Trump’s Muslim Immigration Ban
Because, you see, “hope” must triumph over “fear.”
May 16, 2016
Robert Spencer
don-byer.jpg


Love him or hate him, Donald Trump has certainly turned American politics on its head. Has it ever happened before in American history that a political party began to frame legislation against an opposing candidate’s proposals before he was even elected – much less one whose election was as inconceivable as the mainstream media would have us believe about Donald Trump? Yet that is exactly what the Democrats are doing: Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) is spearheading a bill that would block a President Trump from instituting the temporary halt on Muslim immigration into the United States that he has proposed.

“It’s very narrow in scope,” says Beyer of his Freedom of Religion Act. “We’re not going to discriminate when it comes to immigration based on religion.” He added that his bill was intended to “appeal to hope rather than fear.” In our pusillanimous and puerile age, “fear” is not just a weakness of character, but a moral flaw: if you fear being beheaded or blown up by Islamic jihadists, you’re an evil person. And to be sure, fear is never to be encouraged or given into, but its opposite is not hope, it’s courage and resoluteness.

Beyer is not offering courage or resoluteness. He is proposing a ban on using someone’s religion as a reason for blocking them from entering the country based on the politically correct fiction that Islamic jihad terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, and that therefore to be concerned about jihad terrorists entering the country along with peaceful Muslim refugees is simply a manifestation of bigotry, racism and “Islamophobia.”

...

For Leftists like Don Beyer and Jeremy Scahill, the mass murder of innocent non-Muslim civilians in the U.S. is preferable to taking any effective action to defend our nation – for to do so would be to succumb to “fear,” that fear that our Leftist moral superiors insist is a character defect. Why did the U.S. declare war on Japan after Pearl Harbor? Instead of giving in to “fear,” it should have laid down its arms and opened the door to unrestricted Japanese immigration. Britain should have done the same thing after Hitler invaded Poland: instituted a ban on anti-Nazi legislation and opened its arms and its shores to the Germans. What could possibly have gone wrong? Primitive man should never have fashioned a spear; he should instead have let the lion maul him; instead, he gave in to “fear.”

Don Beyer and the Democrats are, for the umpteenth time, demanding that the nation choose defeat and suicide.

Democrats Try to Outlaw Trump’s Muslim Immigration Ban
 
Nothing wrong with banning Muslims from America when you consider how many Europeans have been murdered by Muslims in the last few months.

Dems are supporting a loser in this one. Hell they should kick all Muslims out of the US and not allow refugee's in.

Common Sense 101
 
This president has been a dictator who seldom goes to Congress and dictates his will through Executive orders. He took an oath to follow standing laws and keep out country safe as best he can. When he fights for porous borders, refuses to deport illegals and increases the number of Middle Eastern aliens coming in, he increases the danger to our citizens.

I would like for someone who lost a family member to an illegal's crimes sue the president for not abiding by our laws.
 
Presidents past did the same and worse, just look at Obama's crap...

Who’s The Crazy One?

Why Trump's Muslim ban resonates.
December 10, 2015
David Horowitz

dt.jpg


Presidential candidate Donald Trump has called for a moratorium on Muslim immigration until we can figure out why Islamic terrorists have been able to enter our country and devised ways to protect ourselves. This has caused the left and right establishments to dogpile on Trump. Echoing the sentiments of virtually all Democrats and many Republicans, a Washington Post editorial has declared that Trump’s proposal disqualifies him as a candidate because in the Post’s view what he recommends is unconstitutional and therefore un-American. But President Obama has issued executive orders – as it happens orders that sabotage our borders - that he himself has called unconstitutional (“I don’t have the authority to stop deportations”). Has the Post editorialized that this is un-American and disqualifies him for the presidency? Has it called for Obama to be impeached? Have Democrats ridiculed Obama for his un-American prescriptions?

Consider the nature of the threat. A 2009 “World Opinion” survey by the University of Maryland showed that between 30 and 50% of Muslims in Jordan, Egypt and other Islamic countries approved of the terrorist attacks on America and that only a minority of Muslims “entirely disapproved” of them. ISIS has acknowledged its plans to use refugee programs to infiltrate its terrorists into the United States and other infidel countries. In Minneapolis we have a Somali refugee community many of whose members have returned to Syria to fight for ISIS. Other Muslim immigrants like Major Hassan and Tashfeen Malik have carried out barbaric acts of terror here at home. Today Muslim terrorists are using assault rifles and pipe bombs, but we know they have Sarin gas and other chemical weapons which they might use tomorrow. The terrorists inexorably arrive along with the other immigrants, no one in authority apparently knowing who’s who. Who, then, in his right mind does not think that Muslim immigration poses a serious security threat to us?

The outrage against Trump should properly have been directed at our president who refuses to identify the enemy as Islamic terrorism, who has opened the door to nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to the Islamic America-haters in Iran, whose policies have created the vacuums that ISIS has filled, and who even after Paris and San Bernardino is determined to bring 100,000 immigrants from Syrian war zones to our unprotected shores. This outrage is missing and it is precisely because it is missing that Trump’s unconstitutional proposal resonates with so many rightly concerned Americans. When the man in charge of our security is by general consensus out to lunch in regard to fighting the war on Islamic terror, or protecting us at home, a proposal like Trump’s, which at least recognizes the threat, is going to resonate with the public.

In middle of a crisis of national security, the Democratic Party seems to think that climate change and especially gun ownership are greater threats to our survival than the one that comes from hundreds of millions of Muslims who think America should be attacked and who believe the whole world should be put under medieval Islamic law. In the face of this threat, the Democratic Party and its leaders seem to have no problem with the fact that we have more than 350 “Sanctuary Cities” that are dedicated to sabotaging our immigration laws; that we have no southern border and as a result have 179,000 illegal alien criminals and who knows how many terrorists in our country today.

...

Donald Trump’s great contribution is saying the unsayable; putting things on the table that would otherwise be buried; calling a spade a spade in a time when political correctness has made us unable to discuss things that have to do with our basic national survival. This is the crux of the issue. Every time he creates a controversy like this he also tells this country that its emperors, Republican and Democrat, have no clothes. That they prefer propriety over defending the country. That they are dedicated only to keeping the lid on a cauldron of threat and challenge they have allowed to boil over.

The 2016 election will be a referendum on the defense of this country and its survival. Let’s see who answers the call.

Who’s The Crazy One?


Trump's idea of a ban on Syrian Muslims makes perfect sense. One has only to look at the videos of the thousands of young, fighting age males streaming across the borders into Europe. (1) there is AT LEAST a 50/50 chance that at least SOME of them are terrorists and (2) If these fighting age males are too cowardly to fight for their own damned country - why would we want them here - sucking off the tit of the American taxpayer?
 
Nothing wrong with banning Muslims from America when you consider how many Europeans have been murdered by Muslims in the last few months.

Dems are supporting a loser in this one. Hell they should kick all Muslims out of the US and not allow refugee's in.

Common Sense 101
How would you determine if they are Muslim or not. Maybe something like this? If they look middle eastern then waterboard them until they tell us they are Muslim.
 
Nothing wrong with banning Muslims from America when you consider how many Europeans have been murdered by Muslims in the last few months.

Dems are supporting a loser in this one. Hell they should kick all Muslims out of the US and not allow refugee's in.

Common Sense 101
How would you determine if they are Muslim or not. Maybe something like this? If they look middle eastern then waterboard them until they tell us they are Muslim.


Shoot - works for me! ;)
 
This president has been a dictator who seldom goes to Congress and dictates his will through Executive orders. He took an oath to follow standing laws and keep out country safe as best he can. When he fights for porous borders, refuses to deport illegals and increases the number of Middle Eastern aliens coming in, he increases the danger to our citizens.
Obama Has Deported More Immigrants Than Any Other President. Now He's Running Up the Score.


Absolute bullshit.

High deportation figures are misleading

Ask the Border patrol how many illegals are being captured and released.

House Border Security Caucus: Obama Not Allowing Agents to Do Their Job, ‘Putting Every American at Risk’
 
This president has been a dictator who seldom goes to Congress and dictates his will through Executive orders. He took an oath to follow standing laws and keep out country safe as best he can. When he fights for porous borders, refuses to deport illegals and increases the number of Middle Eastern aliens coming in, he increases the danger to our citizens.
Obama Has Deported More Immigrants Than Any Other President. Now He's Running Up the Score.


Absolute bullshit.

High deportation figures are misleading
No. What is misleading --- actually flat out untrue --- is anything and everything you post.
 
This president has been a dictator who seldom goes to Congress and dictates his will through Executive orders. He took an oath to follow standing laws and keep out country safe as best he can. When he fights for porous borders, refuses to deport illegals and increases the number of Middle Eastern aliens coming in, he increases the danger to our citizens.
Obama Has Deported More Immigrants Than Any Other President. Now He's Running Up the Score.


Absolute bullshit.


High deportation figures are misleading
No. What is misleading --- actually flat out untrue --- is anything and everything you post.


Jesus - I know you are but what am I - How the hell old are you? 12?


Useful idiot.
 
Nothing wrong with banning Muslims from America when you consider how many Europeans have been murdered by Muslims in the last few months.

Dems are supporting a loser in this one. Hell they should kick all Muslims out of the US and not allow refugee's in.

Common Sense 101
How would you determine if they are Muslim or not. Maybe something like this? If they look middle eastern then waterboard them until they tell us they are Muslim.

In order to get into the country they need a passport dumbass. A passport tells you where they are from. The refugees are coming from Syria and there are nothing but Muslims in Syria any Christians have already been killed by ISIS. Dumbass.

You are a fool and an idiot.
 

Forum List

Back
Top