Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 37,828, Reputation: 5427
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #21

    Jun 6, 2017, 11:02 AM
    until such a time that a proper vetting process can be put in place.
    We DO have a two+-year vetting process in place. We need a more stringent one? Why?
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,043, Reputation: 10852
    Expert
     
    #22

    Jun 6, 2017, 12:28 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Bottom line is that it it REASONABLE to have a temporary travel ban from the nations that have been identified ....not by Trump ;but by the Obama Administration ,...until such a time that a proper vetting process can be put in place. They are nations with failed governments or hostile governments .

    Of course herr Donald opened his pie hole yesterday and undermined his cause and threw his AG under the bus in the process . Still it is reasonable to take such precautions . Some of the attackers in the last 2 weeks returned to England from Libya .
    Nothing Trump has done is remotely reasonable, not even when he has copied his predecessor's policy. I bet he hasn't even worked out a plan to EXTREMELY VET anybody from anywhere. It's all talk and bluster for his base.

    If we were experiencing attacks at the rate that Europe is ,this whole country would be singing a different tune.
    Yeah drive by's and hate crimes against minorities don't count as terrorism.
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 495, Reputation: 54
    Full Member
     
    #23

    Jun 6, 2017, 01:11 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman View Post
    Nothing Trump has done is remotely reasonable, not even when he has copied his predecessor's policy. I bet he hasn't even worked out a plan to EXTREMELY VET anybody from anywhere. It's all talk and bluster for his base.

    Trump is again proving himself to be a complete moron. The most basic of management tasks - hiring replacements - is beyond his ken. He can't even do that. His WH/Presidency is crashing because of this simple mismanagement. And he's supposed to be this great businessman. He's a great con man is what he is.

    Stupid today blamed the Dems for the lack of approval of his appointees in the Senate. THE SENATE IS CONTROLLED BY REPUBLICANS !!!

    How much longer ??
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,043, Reputation: 10852
    Expert
     
    #24

    Jun 6, 2017, 02:56 PM
    Until his base of supporters is eroded, or the congress changes I am afraid the SHOW goes on for a few years anyway.

    Think fall 2018...

    The good news, late night comedy has never been better!!
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,970, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #25

    Jun 6, 2017, 07:49 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    If we were experiencing attacks at the rate that Europe is ,this whole country would be singing a different tune.

    Bottom line is that it it REASONABLE to have a temporary travel ban from the nations that have been identified ....not by Trump ;but by the Obama Administration ,...until such a time that a proper vetting process can be put in place. They are nations with failed governments or hostile governments .
    until such a time that a proper vetting process can be put in place
    Let me emphasize that, which points out the fallacy of your post. The first EO was issued in February. More than 90 days have past. The court issued stays blocked the travel restrictions. They did NOT block the development of better vetting procedures. So those procedures could have an should have been developed by now. In fact Trump recently tweeted that "extreme vetting" WAS in place. Thereby making the temporary suspensions requested in the EOs moot and superfluous.

    I will also point out that in the ensuing months since the first EO there have been NO terrorists attacks performed by Muslims on US soil, extremists or otherwise. In fact there have been no attacks by foreign nationals since 9/11. So I'm not sure what "proper" vetting process was needed since whatever we have doing seems to be working.

    It just points out the truth that Trump's xenphobia wants to just ban Muslims.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,704, Reputation: 171
    Ultra Member
     
    #26

    Jun 6, 2017, 10:32 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottGem View Post

    It just points out the truth that Trump's xenphobia wants to just ban Muslims.
    Might be true, but you can't blame the guy for wanting to protect citizens from xenophopic personages who reside in ME countries, as well as other places, and the best way to do this is to deny entry and make them jump through hoops in visa applications. In these days of electronic communication business can be conducted without entry, so travel isn't essential unless you are a resident.

    I think you are incorrect in saying there have been no muslim terrorist attacks on US soil

    http://www.dailywire.com/news/11410/...-james-barrett
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 341
    Ultra Member
     
    #27

    Jun 7, 2017, 03:08 AM
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,704, Reputation: 171
    Ultra Member
     
    #28

    Jun 7, 2017, 05:23 AM
    Yes Tom, exactly. For 1,400 years muslims have been killing others in name of Islam, it is time it stopped
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,970, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #29

    Jun 7, 2017, 07:09 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    I think you are incorrect in saying there have been no muslim terrorist attacks on US soil

    A Complete List of Radical Islamic Terror Attacks on U.S. Soil Under Obama | Daily Wire
    Clete, That's NOT what I said. I said "there have been no attacks by foreign nationals since 9/11". Read that link again. You will see all those incidents were committed by American citizens or legal residents. Some born in the US, others here for decades. They were radicalized, either self-radicalized or by contact with Islamic extremists. I believe at least 2 of the 3 from London were legal British residents or citizens.

    That's one of the reasons I was against the EO. It gave ISIS ammunition to help them radicalize citizens. Look how your country hates Muslims, they want to ban them and throw them out of the country! Trump is giving them a weapon to use.

    I'm all for make them "jump through hoops" to get visas. And that's part of my point. That Trump has had the 90 days he asked for to put such procedures into place. So suspending immigration should be a moot point.

    P.S. to Tom. That cartoon is a ridiculous over-exaggeration. While I consider myself more of a moderate, that is not what most liberals think. They do not embrace terrorists. But they do believe that Islam is a peaceful religion and that terrorists pervert the teachings of the Quran to justify they actions.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,704, Reputation: 171
    Ultra Member
     
    #30

    Jun 7, 2017, 10:29 PM
    You are splitting hairs Scott, a muslim is just as dangerous whether he is a "legal" resident, a born here muslim or a recent arrival. Yes, a group of saudi muslims did perpetrate 9/11, but they were in the country legally, a point I think was not lost on Trump, who may have had a front row seat. It is time for the west to stop blaming itself for muslim terrorists and realise it is the nature of the beast
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 495, Reputation: 54
    Full Member
     
    #31

    Jun 7, 2017, 10:57 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    ... a point I think was not lost on Trump, who may have had a front row seat.
    Yes, we all remember it well. Trump in his front row seat in Jersey City watching all the muslims dancing and cheering as they watched the WTC in flames across the Hudson. Trump informed us they were in the thousands !! Only problem was, IT WAS ALL IN HIS HEAD.

    This was one of the earliest instances of Trump's COMPLETE AND UTTER INSANITY. Since then, he has exhibited the same insane behavior on an almost daily basis.

    Praise God, his handlers have so far prevented the lunatic from dropping the bomb on some nation whom he perceives to have slighted him.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,970, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #32

    Jun 8, 2017, 03:30 AM
    No I'm not splitting hairs. The thrust of Trump's Exec Order is that we need to stop people coming into this country who will do us harm. The 9/11 attackers (most from Saudi Arabia by the way) were all foreign nationals. But since then, no foreign national has come in and committed such acts. That indicates that whatever safeguards were put in place after 9/11 are working. That's the point and it is a valid one. But I'm not opposed to improving those safeguards if we can. I just don't think a ban on issuing visas is necessary, especially at this point, since Trump has had more than 120 days to institute more stringent vetting. If anything, more effort needs to be placed on ferreting out or, better yet preventing, the people being radicalized.

    And, I reject your contention that "it is the nature of beast". The terrorists do NOT represent most Muslims. They are a perversion of Islam.

    Oh and by the way, I DID have a front row seat. I was on the 50th floor of the South Tower when the first plane hit.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,043, Reputation: 10852
    Expert
     
    #33

    Jun 8, 2017, 03:38 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    You are splitting hairs Scott, a muslim is just as dangerous whether he is a "legal" resident, a born here muslim or a recent arrival. Yes, a group of saudi muslims did perpetrate 9/11, but they were in the country legally, a point I think was not lost on Trump, who may have had a front row seat. It is time for the west to stop blaming itself for muslim terrorists and realise it is the nature of the beast
    So are you and your obsessive racist blind hate of Muslims, or is it Asians, or native born of your own country. I guess that's the nature of your own beast.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,704, Reputation: 171
    Ultra Member
     
    #34

    Jun 8, 2017, 07:03 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman View Post
    So are you and your obsessive racist blind hate of Muslims, or is it Asians, or native born of your own country. I guess that's the nature of your own beast.
    What I oppose are people who kill in the name of religion, people who lie in the name of religion and people who molest children in the name of religion. Not all are muslim but most of them are. I don't mind asians, most east asians are polite, industrious, people but I don't like bludgers of any persuasion, many of these can be found among the so called muslim refugees and some indigenous, by the way, I am native born in my own country, at least six generations, From my perspective many muslims are trouble makers, you don't see people of my race, or religious persuasion, rioting in the streets over some imagined slight or turning their back on an observance of a minutes silence for the victims of muslim extremism in London. The Saudi Arabian soccer team did this in my country today.

    My response to the blind hatred portrayed by muslims in the world today can be sung to the WWI ditty, Bless 'em all, appropriate change of wording of course

    I lost my innocence in these matters long ago, the americans in Vietnam taught me that.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,970, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #35

    Jun 8, 2017, 10:42 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    What I oppose are people who kill in the name of religion, people who lie in the name of religion and people who molest children in the name of religion. Not all are muslim but most of them are.
    I oppose the same things. I even agree with you, that in today's world the people most doing those things are Muslim. I have said often that the worst crimes in history have been done in the name of religion. Like the Crusades and the Inquisition.

    Where I don't agree with you is that most Muslims do those things. This is my basic problem. You seem to believe that just being Muslim makes some hate all others. That's the same as saying that all jews are moneygrubbers. It's a false sterotype.

    A Jewish synagogue recently burned down in Texas. The local Muslim community was one of the first to make a large donation to help rebuild. This is why I reject your stereotype.
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 495, Reputation: 54
    Full Member
     
    #36

    Jun 10, 2017, 12:36 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottGem View Post
    I have said often that the worst crimes in history have been done in the name of religion. Like the Crusades and the Inquisition.
    First, to Paraclete. Yes, I agree that people who kill (and lie) in the name of religion give a bad name to religion. But who molests children in the name of religion? What religion?

    To Scott above -- "...the worst crimes in history have been done in the name of religion. Like the Crusades and the Inquisition". Have you considered WW2 (or just about any other modern war) as a worst crime candidate? Religion based or otherwise? Not only the Nazi horrors or the Japanese brutalities, but Dresden, the Russo-German atrocities on the eastern front, the wholesale slaughter of German and Japanese civilians - women, children and the elderly, all non-combatants - by terror bombing by the US and UK?

    As to the repeated canard re the Crusades - what crime? A militant Islam overruns the entire eastern Mediterranean and the victims are not allowed to seek aid in fighting back? What rules of war are broken here that are criminal? Don't apply today's thinking to that of earlier centuries. That's called anachronism - an exercise in faulty logic, a chronological inconsistency.

    The Inquisition - Probably more than any other, this almost thousand-year program of the Catholic Church has been consistently misunderstood and misrepresented. The truth is nuanced and doesn't lend itself to easily digestible sound bites. Again, anachronism rears its confusing head.

    The biggest bugaboo is the Spanish variety. In 15th century Spain, the Moors (Islam) had finally been driven out of Spain after a 700-year occupation. With the cooperation of the Church, the secular authorities made heresy a punishable crime. Heresy, in 15th century terms, was equivalent to sedition - a crime forbidden today by all modern nations.

    Popular imagination has pegged the number of executed victims as high as 50,000,000. An absurd figure. Serious historians have estimated the number of executions for the thousand year period at between 800 and 2,000. The enormous majority of punishments were penances and/or fines. For comparison sake, the witch hunts of post-Reformation Germany were far worse in numbers of executions.

    Finally, a horrible picture of the Inquisition remains of victims being burned at the stake. Almost impossible for the modern mind to fathom is that such punishment was considered an act of mercy (compared to other forms of execution). The burning ensured that the souls would escape the torment of hell which otherwise the souls would have been eternally condemned to. We moderns don't think in those terms anymore, but back then even the brightest intellects did so.

    Back to the original post. You can't sweep/condemn with a broad brush a billion Muslims because a tiny few are crazy fundamentalists. If you are one of the millions of ordinary Muslims, it's not easy to speak out when a crazy might be right next to you in the mosque waiting to behead you if you DO speak out. Also, maybe the media doesn't cover the brave Muslims that DO speak out. Such is the nature of terror where so few can do so much evil.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,704, Reputation: 171
    Ultra Member
     
    #37

    Jun 10, 2017, 05:12 PM
    Such is the nature of terror where so few can do so much evil.
    What you are saying that the muslims should be excused for not speaking out because they are terrorised, and no doubt you would excuse the germans for the same reason, no, both drank the koolaid, and the muslims continue to drink it. You don't understand, they worship the quoran as if it were God and explain away its inconsistencies by saying God changed his mind, they are working their way to heaven and the quick way is to kill unbelievers and become a martyr. You think only a small number believe this but jihad is required of every muslim, it is a religious obligation just as is a pilgrimage to Mecca, the centre of wahabbist belief, is a religious obligation
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,043, Reputation: 10852
    Expert
     
    #38

    Jun 10, 2017, 05:46 PM
    You cannot be that ignorant that you don't know there are as many sects of Islam as there are in Christianity.

    Jihad

    Jihad is an Islamic term referring to the religious duty of Muslims to maintain the religion. In Arabic, the word jihād is a noun meaning the act of "striving, applying oneself, struggling, persevering". A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid, the plural of which is mujahideen.



    Dumb racist!! I won't even bother to tell you the difference between Sunni and Shia, Arab, Asian, African or American, and Indian Muslims, or those of Eastern Europe, et al. Look it up instead of making it up! A hate spewing ignorant Christian nut is no better than those ISIS nuts.

    You both are misguided hypocrites of your own faiths.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,704, Reputation: 171
    Ultra Member
     
    #39

    Jun 10, 2017, 05:56 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman View Post

    Dumb racist!!
    I am neither dumb nor racist but unlike dumb americans I don't think Islam is a race, it is a death cult. Jihad has many meanings from the personal fight against your own nature to active war against un-believers. Daesh is the latest manifestation of the holy warriors and I will not excuse anyone who supports this in any form. America supported the mujahideen in Afghanistan for its own purposes and so spawned al qaeda and ISIS, but both are the result of wahhabist doctrine originating in and promoted by Saudi Arabia, the same place where your stupid president danced their little war dance and kowtowed to the king, and the 9/11 bomber came from. Wake up america you are being played for fools once again
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,043, Reputation: 10852
    Expert
     
    #40

    Jun 10, 2017, 06:01 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    I am neither dumb nor racist
    At least acknowledge your ignorance, as you deny your racism, as that is the only explanation for you not having a clue what you are talking about.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.



View more questions Search