Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Menu There is no diplomatic solutionIsrael should declare three nos;
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
yamit82 Said:
It is possible that those loopholes already exist… applications for visas, immigration and citizenship likely already contain them… a matter of interpretation.
@ yamit82:
I agree
By the way, folks here should take note that in switzerland you must be approved for citizenship by your neighbors… they must say that you are compatible to fit in with their culture. this is a good approach which helps ensure keeping out the bad apples. It takes 20 years of residency and you are still not guaranteed. right now a rich american cant get it. All we need to do is look at our history and how other nations operate to see how things are done successfully now.
Ted Belman Said:
the president can ban the immigration of any individual or group he considers to be a danger… there is a law passed in the “50’s. In any case the details now are unimportant, it is achievable, it has been done with others… first we must agree on who we want to ban or deport… its not nations, its muslims…. muslims who believe and practice sharia are the danger. Even an israpundit think tank could work out the details in a few months.
the muslim sharia and terror network depends on muslim orgs, mosques institutions and networks… start with CAIR and MB… a bill is already in the house… a trump presidency could pass it. Once they are declared terror orgs all their info and assets can be seized and the networks and individuals known… they would be the start of dealing with home grown muslims. As for immigrants, ban them outright until a foolproof method of ascertaining a terror muslim from a safe muslim becomes available… if no foolproof method arrives then it becomes permanent. The onus is on being sure… when in doubt, ban.
Bill Narvey Said:
LOL, what is obvious is that you are a man of very limited vision. As a result of your inability to envisioning that possiblity you assume it to be impossible rather than simply an indication of your incompetence. There is no evidence for your statement of impossibility beyond your limited thinking capacity, at least you certainly have not stated that evidence here. What you have stated are problems which you foresee but Trump knows that every business venture with a goal is frought with problems…. but those who spend their lives on salary are unaware of that process.
Bill Narvey Said:
gosh, no one was elected, no one made an investigation, no one convened a think tank and already Yamit gave you an answer which makes it possible. However, there are many more e.g. citizenship has been stripped from those in the past including nazis. After it was stripped they were sent back to their nation from which they arrived or were born. Looks like your first insurmountable impossible problem is already a dud, and we have not begun to tackle the problem.
Bill Narvey Said:
all you need to check is what happened in the past when that occurred and then you can answer your own question without embarassing yourself and showing your ignorance. DUH, laws, agreements, international conventions, threats to cut aid, etc etc etc. its all been done already. next…
Bill Narvey Said:
we are not here to solve all the problems which will come up right now…. what is important is to identify the goals. Trump knows that it is important to be clear on the goals, like banning muslim immigration, as a target to aim for….. but in business and projects when you hit an obstacle you dont give up and throw away your goals… you adjust your approach and sometimes you even move your goalposts….. this is a common approach of folks who know how to get things done, to build projects, to make achievements… this is one reason I support Trump, I have no doubt that his capacity and capability for getting things done at a lower cost is far beyond that of any of the incompetent crooks who are career politicians.
Furthermore, I acutally did “think things through more” becuase my first reaction was that Gimgrich was muddying the waters by calling up sharia rather than focus on muslims or radical muslims. After giving it some thought I concluded that his approach was a very practical way to determine who was a muslim… banning immigration from syria is not the problem because christians from syria can come without danger… duh, its the muslims. The tenets of sharia are a long list of every trait which makes a practicing beliving muslim incompatible with democracy and rights, incompatible with western culture, an existential danger to our nation and all non muslims within it. If a muslim observes sharia then he is defacto no good for us. He can be asked the question and asked the individual beleifs as either one will disqualify his eligibility for immigration, residence, a tourist visa, a work visa, or citizenship. Any one caught lying will later be stripped of citizenship… like the nazis caught lying on their citizenship apps. Sharia is the long list of despicable practices in which muslims believe and engage.
I notice that you never answered to any of my points of how it can be done especially beginning with declaring the unindicted co conspirators in terror… CAIR and the MB… as terror orgs. This would begin a domino effect. Granted some non practicing muslims who never went to a mosque and are citizens would slip throught the cracks but I am not worried about those few.
Bill Narvey Said:
eeveryone already seized on it and Trump won the GOP nomination against all odds because he said what the people want. Anyone who calls anti muslim or anti Islam racist is an illiterate in need of a dictionary .
You have not supported the veracity of any of your assertions and all you have demonstrated is the limitation of your thought process. Everyone here is able to see how it can be done step by step… details can be worked out on assuming the presidency and forming a commission of advisors to work out the details..duh.
I suggest you consult with Obama because even he taught you the efficacy of “yes we can”. No rocket science here unless your name is Narvey.
@ Ted Belman:
Yes but not enough, Communism never considered and not protected as a religion. One would need I think to remove Islam as a protected religion under the constitution….
@ yamit82:
Uou can’t ban a belief but you can ban the Communist Party for example. You can ban the advocating of taking over America and replacing the constitution with Sharia. You can ban Sharia Courts and not give any legitimacy to their decisions. etc etc.
bernard ross Said:
A few more major attacks against Americans you will be called a racist and traitor if you don’t oppose Muslims and Sharia…. Flight to safety and security trumps all stupid democratic and librul principles and ethos….. Unless you are a stupid European or Canadian. I am speaking of normal people with normal instincts of survival. I still think most Americans still have such positive instincts; over 300 million guns in the hands of Americans attest to and support my opinion.
@ Ted Belman:
You can’t ban belief in a creed or faith based religion it will just go undereground….. after all many if not most will lie to remain You need to ban both the creed and those who follow it.
@ Bill Narvey:
All you need is to enforce the laws of sedition and or create new laws to cover any loopholes…. Sharia by any novice reading and I have read much should be enough to deny citizenship and entry to the USA by aliens so if it is sufficient to deny citizenship to aliens even entry to the USA, certainly a case can be made for those with citizenship…. First declare war on Islam then the president can do to them what FDR did to the Japs lock em up in camps…. You can give them an out by allowing them to leave and make the Saudis pay and by confiscating Mosques (mostly financed by Saudis and gulf states)and property, selling them to pay for removal of Muslims who adhere to the Muslim creed deemed by objective authorities inimical to constitutional loyalty and fidelity…. Key here is declaration or war against Islam.
2 years ago Obama sent a drone to kill an American Jihadi un Yemen an American citizen who was deemed an enemy of the state….. If you can kill em you can remove citizenship and deport them or lockem up.
@ Bill Narvey:
You mean like Guantanamo???? Duhhhh 😛 Then there are all those FEMA concentration camps might as well put them to good use 😀
@ Bernard Ross
I said that the reasons why Gingrich’s proposal is naive and impossible to fulfill are obvious.
Clearly you are one of those who has missed the obvious entirely,if the obvious was ever within your grasp.
Just one hint Bernard – Gingrich did not discriminate between citizen and immigrant Muslims. Exactly where will a U.S. citizen Muslim who fails the test, assuming one can even be lawfully administered, be deported to? As for immigrant Muslims without citizenship, what happens if their home nation doesn’t want them back?
Maybe think it through a bit more and you’ll likely come up with other obvious problems I alluded to with Gringrich’s proposal.
I beleive that killing jews and infidels is a shariah principle considered to be a good deed… like honor killing, raping infidels, chopping infidel heads, jews paying jizya?
nothing to see here folks, just your every day shariah.
Westerns who allow sharia in their nations are simply giving the finger in advance of the whole arm… like the pal sharia followers they will take a little freely given under taqiyya and later, with patience, take the rest through intimidation, force, violence. Islam has a history… look at its history and look how its current events reflect that history. When under attack Islam lays low… its called taqiyya.
Bill Narvey Said:
OR, you can just keep dying.
there are many ways to do it, there is no need to come up now with the exact methods. The need now is to recognize the source of the danger and decide to attack the problem at its source. banning muslim immigration is the first step. Second, is to deport all those muslims that are involved in seditious orgs and mosques like CAIR etc. When declaring the CAIR and MB terror connected orgs you immediately make all their assets available and all their local muslim connections deportable. It is better to deport them now than to have to kill them or yourself later…
I did not see your solution to the muslim problem detailed here… I only see your concern with voters who identify the muslim threat with racism… they will not vote for Trump even if he completely changes his mind…. however, a few more atrocities and they might be changing their mind. Dealing with the muslim threat, not IS, is the main problem. Those who have been calling donald a racist for identifying the muslim threat in the gop were rejected. For more votes from the left he will push his non gop anti TPP platform AND show how Islam is not a race but a dangerous defacto threat due to its ideology and its practicing member ship.
Bill Narvey Said:
Trumps votes came from identifying the source of the problem as muslims… the more he leaves that is the less credible he will be… especially since increasing muslim atrocities prove him correct. Islam is not a race nor an ethnicity… it is a belief system like naziism. Seeking votes from those who cant tell the difference is futile.
Bill Narvey Said:
No, that is why mosques and muslim institutions should be closed and muslims with questionable ties immediately deported. After a few more atrocities the decision will be easier…. but more will die first while folks wrestle with the “conundrum” and red herring.
Muslims must quit Islam or leave.. or be given the same status as non muslims in saudi.
Bill Narvey Said:
this is taking place in europe, which is falling to pieces.
Bill Narvey Said:
wont work as europe is proving…. too late for them. This is one of those issues where your first choice must be the right choice as you will get no second chance. Brexit will not help UK avoid what is has already done.
Bill Narvey Said:
LOL, thats what europe thought… just let them be… accomodate them… dont make waves. This is the position of european appeasers who have repeatedly demonstrated the folly of that approach.
@ Bill Narvey:
Bill, you got me thinking and I decided that I didn’t know enough about sharia so I did some googling. I found one article which I posted and look forward to reading more such articles.
Ted, I believe you are conflating 3 very distinct issues into one and thus not doing justice to either one of them.
1. Whether Gingrich’s comments were racist or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether they will be perceived as racist by the voting public. You can bet both the Clinton campaign and the MSMS will so portray Gingrich’s words that way and try to say Gingrich’s views reflect Trump’s views. To the extent that linkage is made, it will be damaging to Trump.
Further on that score, as brilliant as Gingrich is, sometimes his brilliant stream of consciousness is invaded by a less than brilliant notion such as during a 2012 Repub presidential nomination debate, he blurted out that by 2020, there would be bases on the moon where Americans could go to live. He got mocked and hammered for that one.
2. Was Gingrich’s proposal naive because it is impossible to be implemented. I sure think so.
3. Banning Sharia law. What would an all out ban achieve?
Will banning recognition and application of Sharia law from the U.S./Canadian legal system keep Muslims here from radicalizing or induce them to abandon segregation and welcome integration and assimilation into our Western culture, whereby they adopt all our values and respect for our laws as being the law of the land?
Incidentally, while there is a move afoot in a number if not many U.S. States to ban Sharia Law altogether, it seems to be recognized and applied to at least some extent in cases involving Muslim litigants and where the Sharia law applicable to the case at hand, does not conflict with the U.S. constitution and presumably American values, generally or regionally.
In Canada, our legal system does countenance and apply Sharia law with the proviso it does not conflict with our constitution and laws.
In both the U.S. and Canada such recognition and application of Sharia law is mostly seen in cases involving Muslim litigants and complainants in civil rights and human rights commission complaints matters.
@ Bill Narvey:
Bill, you are off the mark here. Rather than focus on whether it is “racist” to deport people who support Sharia, you should focus on banning the application of Sharia law anywhere in the US. Surely you support that.
Gingrich is ordinarily a composed intelligent man given to expressing composed, intelligent views.
This Paris terrorist attack was perhaps the radical Islamic straw that broke the back of Gingrich’s composed intelligent nature.
Proposing that America must vet and subject every Muslim in America to a grilling to determine whether they believe in Sharia law and if so deport them, is a statement that is on its face shockingly and naively reactionary and it speaks to a policy impossible to implement and achieve for a number of very obvious reasons.
The liberal MSM media will no doubt seize on Gingrich’s statement, call it racist and seek to link it to Trump’s first statement 6 or so months ago, about banning all Muslim immigration which they characterized as racist. Even with walking that statement back somewhat, the media and the Clinton machine are still using Trump’s first words about banning all Muslim immigration to call Trump a racist and a bigot.
Trump will need to distance himself from Gingrich on Gingrich’s statement aforesaid obviously born of anger and frustration.
If Trump had announced Gingrich as his pick for VP, this statement by Gingrich alone would have likely been enough to badly damage Trump’s chances at winning the presidency.
As it is, Gingrich’s statement should give Trump pause about fulfilling his promise that Gingrich in one way or another would be part of a Trump administration.
Only muslims are capable of these atrocities… keep them out and carefully supervise those already here. I dont know or care what kind of muslims are doing it…. but I do know without a doubt that it is muslims doing it….. just get them all out. Its too late for france, they already have too many there.