Donald Trump's 'No Muslim' Ban- Is it Tyranny Peeking?

1. 78

   Credence2posted 8 years ago

   Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration
   
   (New York, NY) December 7th, 2015, -- Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on.
   
   Mr. Trump stated, "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. 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. If I win the election for President, we are going to Make America Great Again." - Donald J. Trump
   -------------------------------------------------------
   
   Of course, I am going to have problem with anything Donald Trump says or does, because I dislike the man intently. But I have to give him some credit for not being a 'true Republican' in a total sense over all the issues. But not this time.
   
   1. Anyone from anywhere in the world relocating here should be properly vetted by the FBI and appropiate immigration authorities for backgrounds associated with terrorism and violence. I am on board with that.
   
   2.  There is no such thing as a race or group being all of any one characteristic, i.e. Mexican immigrants being criminal or violent inherently or Muslims all being terrorists. If I had to say the same thing about the militant anti-abortionist, racist or anti-government domestic terrorists, that are mostly white folks, it would bring the house down..... Of course from the view of the Right "That's different". Do we remember McVeigh and Nichols, perhaps the more recent slaughter in South Carolina by a fellow named Roof will jar a memory or two?
   
   3. There is no religious litmus test for qualification for American citizenship or the holding of public office
   
   4. So, If Trump wants to go bat**** crazy on this thing, do you really believe he is going to leave American citizens living here that subscribe to the Muslim faith alone?
   
   5. There is a dangerous precedent being set here, folks. You can tell all the rightwinged nutcases that the Hitler they fear is, in fact,  a candidate for the GOP nomination. There is your anti-Christ.
   
   The scriptures speak of a son of an orangutan that rises to power deceiving many as an angel of light. I have to be concerned as so many of you seem to be on board with Trump's master plan. ( a little humor)
   
   So, I have given my piece, what do you think?

   replyreport
   1. 78

      colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Trump is trying to counter jihad. That is something I'll get on board to support.  There are a lot of Muslims who are Muslims in name only, they don't pray to Allah.  True Muslims believe in the teachings of a false god that teaches being deceitful among many other wicked ways.  Islam is a satanic religion, it is not a peaceful one.  They who follow Islam are radicals, some demon possessed beheading people, committing murder on American soil...   They are linked the Islamic terrorists /  jihadists.  Islam is a communist socialist government with Sharia Law, and is not separate from its satanic religion.
      
      By law Islam is prohibited from US immigration for the safety of the United States...but, hey...there's another law that isn't being enforced. 
      
      In fact, there are many verses in the Koran that command Islamists to kill those who do not submit to allah and the prophet. If Congress so desired to hold the White House accountable to the current immigration of refugees (which also must comply with the law), it has the Immigration and Nationality Act to cite. The Administration is breaking that law. The question is "does Congress have the political will to do something about it?" Or shall we be a nation like that in Isaiah 59:14 where, "justice is turned back, and righteousness stands afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter." I think you know the answer, at least for now. But there are a handful of Congressmen who are studying this. Pray. 
      http://www.usacarry.com/forums/off-topi … ation.html
      
      If you don't like the truth, then be careful of what you fall for.  Its all apart of the big picture.   
      
      ADDED:
      
      The U.S. has brought in more than 1.5 million Muslims through the refugee program since the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980.
      Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/staggering-n … Ffpk9cS.99
      
      ADDED:
      
      "The scriptures speak of a son of an orangutan" -  No it does not m'dear.  FALSE!
      
      
      
      Be careful, your getting the Scriptures confused with insults of Bill Maher! 
      
      "And I solemnly declare to everyone who hears the words of prophecy written in this book: If anyone adds anything to what is written here, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book."  -  Revelation 22:18

      replyreport
      1. 78

         Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks for your reply and sharing your opinion.
         
         There are about 8-10 million muslims in the U.S., that is a lot of potential jihad. i don't see any evidence of our society being turned on its head.
         
         I don't care what their beliefs are, there are plenty of kooky Christian sects that would wreak just as much havok if they could. This is a democracy, I think 21st century, I don't criminalize people on what they think or believe, but will prosecute if activity violates the law.
         
         I have going to have to ask you to prove where in the law it states that adherents of Islam are prohibited from entry into the United States?
         
         The so called truth is just more xenophobia, that will always fall apart upon careful examination.

         replyreport
      2. 88

         IslandBitesposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         What a bunch of nonsense! LOL

         replyreport
         1. 78

            colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            The Quran admits that Allah is Satan! 
            Do a little research on those keywords. 

            replyreport
2. 78

   colorfuloneposted 8 years ago

   June 27 1952; congress; Law 414; Chapter 2 section 212
   
   Here's a PDF of Public Law:  scroll down to Chapter 2, Section 212:
   http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-66 … -Pg163.pdf
   
   Counter terrorism / counter jihad / counter Islam / save lives!   
   
   ADDED:
   "I don't criminalize people on what they think or believe, but will prosecute if activity violates the law." 
   
   Prosecute?  Prosecute the Administration.  What?  Do you think Trump doesn't know the immigration laws?  (I do)  He isn't trying to violate the law, that's already being done.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for providing this, it sure seems that the way this was written that we could exclude any group at any time for any reason. That could be interpreted in many ways. I focused on this excerpt:
      
      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, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
      
      You have made your point, but broad brushes against groups of people simply on a bias rather than actual crimes committed will have to stand  under considerable muster among the more enlighted of the progressive community.
      
      Thank you, but I still stand against Trump, his supporters and all that they stand for as archaic to the max. So, we will have to agree to disagree here.
      
      Sure would be a nice way as an excuse for limiting admission to the US for 'people of color', maybe that is the way of 'taking the country back' or 'Making America Great Again"? Clever, so clever, getting around the 1965 change to imigration quotas opening the U.S to all of the world's peoples.

      replyreport
      1. 78

         colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         The archaic Islamic culture and shariah law religious government is anti-american & anti-constitution.  Its very much socialist, Marxist, communist.  I guess if that is what you prefer...that is your choice.  We certainly can agree to disagree, works for me. 
         
         The stakes have just been seriously raised in this already brutal presidential campaign. There is now a brand-new push to stop Donald Trump from being the next president, not by political means, but by assassination. It's not a new push. It's the same old push. And it's coming from those who have the most to lose.  Personally, I'm praying that Trump doesn't get Assassinated.  I believe he knows the great danger he is in...but, he really loves America. 
         http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/kill-trump-e … ssination/
         
         The sad thing is if they are successful at assassinating Trump, they will most likely get away with it like they do with everything else.

         replyreport
         1. 78

            Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

            Trump is a violent and calloused man, but assassination makes him a martyr, and that is the last thing I need to dispense with Trump and Trumpism. I would rather have him fall upon his sword, be ripped to shreds within the world of competing ideas and be completed discredited before all.
            
            Assassination, No, he does not get off that easily....

            replyreport
            1. 78

               colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

               "Trump is a violent and calloused man"  ....  I would like full disclosure on that.   
               
               I believe we have greater problems then that though.  We have violent and calloused jihadist problems that keeps on happening since the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

               replyreport
               1. 78

                  Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

                  Insulting blacks, jews, hispanics and Moslem. But, as an Anglo, that would not bother you much, but we all pay attention and we do must certainly vote. Xenophobia is just more racism and exclusion and that is not going to sell well.  His so called solutions make more problems then they solve.
                  
                  I am looking at the racists, murderous anti-choice activists and anti-government gun nuts as a much bigger threat from my picture window.

                  replyreport
                  1. 78

                     colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                     Xenophobia can also be exhibited in the form of an "uncritical exaltation of another culture" in which a culture is ascribed "an unreal, stereotyped and exotic quality". - Wikipedia
                     
                     Its really all about ones or a group of people's perception.  There have been plenty of insults flying because of the presidential race. That is a part of politics that I dis-like strongly, it goes against my very nature.   
                     
                     I think you have been trying to insult Trump with this thread, (and possibly I) but it may be more of an insult to yourself. I think your better then that, Cred, anyway I hope so.

                     replyreport
                     1. 78

                        Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

                        Yes, I am critical of Trump, just as you are constantly critical of the President, whom I support, and of Hillary Clinton to whom I believe you have engaged with cheap shots. I have been more kind to Trump than he deserves
                        
                        Remember, none of this is personal and I am glad that you came by.  But we come from two different worlds and different perceptions of reality.
                        
                        For someone who dislikes politics, you certainly are quite opinionated about the same.
                        
                        Trump equivocates over the appropriateness of Domestic Japanese internment camps during WWII.
                        
                        The Xenophobia I refer to is an unreasonable fear not based upon fact, and in this country just so many stereotypes. But, in America we have used witch hunts to take out liberal and progressive thought. The Anti-communist blacklists come to mind during the 40s and 50s.
                        
                        You are right, it is about perception and mine is going to naturally differs from yours because as Black folks we know what it means to be excluded and so do most other minorities here. Change the sets on stage but the story remains the same. And most of the more refined of us know that.

                        replyreport
                        1. 78

                           colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                           That's what I like about you, you are more refined!
                           
                           I referred to disliking the insulting that goes along with politics, not politics. 
                           
                           You say that I am "constantly critical of the President".  Its not "constant", that wouldn't allow me to much time for all the pleasures of life.  I'm consistent though. 
                           
                           "Hillary Clinton to whom I believe you have engaged with cheap shots."  I don't really engage in cheap shots, I am a critical thinker and when I smell a conspiracy I do my research. 
                           
                           May I remind you of Benghazi?  Its not over yet as far as I know, there is still an investigation?
                           
                           "“The Obama administration and Clinton officials hid this compelling Benghazi email for years,”
                           The email makes readily apparent that the military was prepared to launch immediate assistance. The fact that the Obama administration withheld this email for so long only worsens the scandal of Benghazi."
                           http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room … -document/
                            
                           Whoa, discrimination!  "But, as an Anglo, that would not bother you much" ...  now that's a cheap shot!   You have no idea what the color of my skin is, do you?  That is what its getting down to with the Obama Administration, exactly and your falling for it.  I don't know, maybe some Anglos are getting some well deserved karma, but that doesn't make the race card any less disgusting to me. 
                           
                           Sounds more like insulting wouldn't bother you much.  An attempt to project an undesirable fault onto me?  It isn't sticking!   
                           
                           

                           replyreport
                           1. 78

                              Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

                              Thanks,
                              
                              But your political views and perspectives pretty much define who you more than likely are, ethnically-racially.
                              
                              I have always heard your line of argument and in my experience the characteristics of the source has always been pretty consistent.
                              
                              Ms. clinton has been absolved of wrong doing on the Bengazi matter, why does the Right keep beating a dead horse?
                              
                              The fact that I will structually and basically differ with you. I do not want you to interpret such as an insult. It is not. You cannot possibly see the world through my eyes and vice-versa.

                              replyreport
                              1. 78

                                 colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                                 I'm sorry but Hillary has not been absolved of wrong doing, especially with the private email scam.  What all happened in Benghazi hasn't been ruled on by a judge yet as far as I know.  Has it? 
                                 
                                 This is your perspective m'dear.  "But your political views and perspectives pretty much define who you more than likely are, ethnically-racially."   
                                 
                                 What defines me is my personal relationship with Jesus Christ our Savior, and our Father, and the Holy Spirit....  My parents and the loving family home life they provided defined me and my relation to God.  Not political views, that's an after thought.   
                                 
                                 I'm sleepy.  Good night!

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 78

                                    Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

                                    Thank you for a most stimulating conversation, perhaps we both learned something..
                                    
                                    My point was that there is a 99 percent probability of your being Anglo, because Anglos say the kinds of things you say. I don't know any minority posters speaking like this and undermining the very basis of their existence within this society. Who among us is going take a knife to his or her own throat?
                                    
                                    AS to Benghazi, I will have to look further to get the details.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 78

                                       colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                                       During the Iranian hostage crisis President Jimmy Carter banned Iranian Muslims from entering the United States.  The US deported Iranian students.  And, 52 American diplomats and citizens were held hostage for 444 days.  They were released as soon as Reagan took office as president, and he didn't even have to drop a bomb. 
                                       
                                       Carter targeted people by nationality and is/ was called a hero by Democrats. Racist?
                                       
                                       "Case Studies in Economic Sanctions and Terrorism:" US vs Iran
                                       https://www.piie.com/publications/paper … n-79-1.pdf
                                       
                                       Trump's proposal does so by ideology and he is called a communist by Democrats and the Republican establishment talking heads. 
                                       
                                       
                                       http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/12 … ge-crisis/
                                       
                                       Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt was Trump on steroids.  Germany, Italy and the Japanese were the Muslims of the day in December, 1941.  Tough circumstances called for tough measures.  Thankful, FDR was the man for the job. 
                                       http://spectator.org/articles/64879/fdr … p-steroids
                                       
                                       But, Trump is being mocked for having the best interests of the US at heart and is willing to take affirmative actions for national security.  He gets attacked by the liberal bias media and demonized when he is right on countering the jihad crisis on American soil.  Hypocritical!
                                       
                                       Every President except this POS has protected the American people!  (edited to add)  But, the jury is still out over 9/11 (George Bush) and the attack on the World Trade Center (Bill Clinton).
                                       
                                       I hope you had a restful nights sleep.  Good day!   
                                       
                                       Added:  Trump RIGHT AGAIN
                                       
                                       

                                       report
                                    2. 78

                                       Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

                                       Three points:
                                       
                                       First of all 'how about the rest of the story'? Carter did not ban Iranian Muslims specifically, his act was against all Iranians nationals in response to a virtual act of war on American citizens in Iran which was sanctioned by the Iranian government.
                                       
                                       This was not a witch hunt against followers of Islam, so guess what? Lets not compare apples and hand grenades, shall we? That dog won't hunt! You will have to do better than that.
                                       
                                       ------------
                                       The internment of American citizens  of Japanese ancestry during WWII was a violation of very tenets of our Constitution. People deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law, that is unacceptable. Considerable monetary reparations were made to the Nisei in an attempt to recognize the error and make amends. And Trump, with his stunning knowledge of American history, wants to open old wounds, well he has succeeded.  The fact that he is oblivious to this just shows how big an idiot Trump actually is. Those of Italian and German descent were not imposed upon in this way, I wonder why? But I think we both know, don't we?
                                       -----------------
                                       
                                       Point Three:
                                       
                                       An article that is dear to my heart from the  Associated Press, you can read it and weep because that is the way things are beginning to look. Gosh if conservative congressman Jeff Flake of Arizona says that Trump is out of line.... it should give many reason to pause. If  9 out of 10 people say that you are drunk, you had better sit down.
                                       
                                       Visualize a  stubborn Donald Trump, resulting in a splintered GOP, resulting in a Democratic victory in the Presidential race, resulting in pure ambrosia for progressives.. The Right is through, you will never get through this thicket of briar in one piece.
                                       
                                       http://news.yahoo.com/trumps-muslim-ban … ction.html
                                       
                                       Regards...

                                       report
3. 78

   colorfuloneposted 8 years ago

   Cred, we were talking about Benghazi. I came across this report from the Select Committee that was released today.  The full report should be released in a few months. 
   
   Washington, D.C.— Select Committee on Benghazi Press Secretary Matt Wolking released the following statement after the Committee conducted its 60th witness interview:
   
   “The Select Committee is on track to complete more than 70 witness interviews before releasing its report in just a few months. And while our investigators are still waiting to receive some documents necessary to complete their work, they have already obtained and reviewed roughly 100,000 pages. These witnesses and documents come from the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, the White House, the CIA and elsewhere, and the majority of them were never examined by a congressional committee. For example, the Select Committee is the first and only Benghazi investigation to include the Secretary of State's emails, and the first to request Ambassador Chris Stevens’ emails. This thorough, fact-centered approach to finding the truth will provide the final, definitive accounting of what happened before, during and after the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attacks, and help prevent this kind of tragedy from happening again.”
   
   Yesterday, the Select Committee interviewed its 60th witness to date, questioning Jeffrey Feltman, the former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. This was one of five scheduled interviews announced by the Select Committee last week.
   
   The Select Committee was established in May 2014 after it was “discovered that the White House had not shared with the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform important e-mails and talking points on what administration officials were encouraged to say in the aftermath of the attack,” Bloomberg View’s Eli Lake reported.
   
   Democrats claimed the Benghazi Select Committee is “the longest-running congressional investigation ever,” but PolitiFact ruled that false.
   
   The Select Committee’s investigation by the numbers:
   
   Total number of witnesses interviewed so far: 60
   
   Witnesses never before interviewed by a congressional committee: 51
   Eyewitnesses to the attacks never before interviewed by a congressional committee: 7
   Total number of pages of documents obtained and reviewed: approximately 100,000
   
   Pages of documents never before obtained or reviewed by a congressional committee: approximately 67,000
   State Department emails related to Benghazi and Libya obtained and reviewed despite the fact that the Obama administration was not in possession of them: 15
   
   http://benghazi.house.gov/news/press-re … th-witness

   replyreport
   1. 74

      Quilligrapherposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      Now these are the numbers that really count and you don’t find them anywhere in the statement released by Press Secretary Matt Wolking after the Select Committee on Benghazi interviewed 60 witnesses, after 7 prior congressional investigations, and after 32 public and private congressional hearings, and 11 published reports on the Benghazi attacks and subsequent investigations:
      
      Number of investigations that have found any administration wrongdoing related to the Benghazi tragedy. [NPR, 11/24/14]: ZERO
      
      Number of investigations to find evidence of an intelligence failure leading to the Benghazi tragedy. [LA Times, 11/22/14]: ZERO
      
      Number of investigations to find evidence of a stand down order. [LA Times, 11/22/14]: ZERO
      
      Number of written questions posed by Benghazi Select Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy in a letter to Secretary Clinton’s attorney. [Chairman Gowdy letter to Clinton attorney, 4/23/15]: 136
      
      Number of questions, out of 136 posed by the Select Committee in a letter to Secretary Clinton, directly related to the tragedy in Benghazi. [Washington Post, 4/23/15]: 8
      
      Number of questions Trey Gowdy admitted he “expected Witness Blumenthal to be able to answer…about the attacks in Benghazi, Libya.” [Trey Gowdy letter to Rep. Cummings, 6/22/15]: ZERO
      
      Number of classified State Department cables stolen by Chelsea Manning and uploaded to WikiLeaks. [The Guardian, 11/28/10]: 250,000
      
      Number of clintonemail.com messages included in the WikiLeaks dump. [ZDNet, 3/5/15]: ZERO
      
      Number of emails sent or received by Hillary Clinton that were marked classified at the time. [Politifact, 7/29/15]: ZERO
      
      Number of emails the State Department said should have been marked as classified when they were sent or received. [CBS News, 8/5/15]: ZERO
      
      Number of laws Hillary Clinton has been charged with violating: ZERO
      
      Number of criminal statutes violated by Hillary Clinton’s email: [Former Federal Prosecutor Anne M. Tomkins opinion, USA Today, 8/31/15]: ZERO
      
      Number of FBI criminal investigations targeting Hillary Clinton. [Washington Post, 8/11/15]: ZERO
      
      Number of criminal inquiries into Hillary Clinton’s email requested by the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community. [State and Intelligence IGs: We Made No Criminal Referral of Clinton, 7/24/15]: ZERO
      
      Number of New York Times articles admitting the paper botched a story about Hillary Clinton’s emails. [New York Times, 7/27/15, 7/27/15, 8/1/15]: 3
      

      replyreport