Exposing the BS in Donald Trump's 'Statement Prevention of Muslim Immigration'

At least it's short. From his campaign website:

(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. According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing "25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad" and 51% of those polled, "agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah." Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won't convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women.

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

Let's just do this real quick, line by line:

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.

Funny, the title of this statement says "immigration." If anyone thinks I'm unfairly "reading between the lines" his campaign manager made sure to tell the AP that he meant everyone, including tourists:

Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told The Associated Press that the proposal would apply to "everybody," including both Muslim tourists and those seeking immigration visas.

Next line:

According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population.

What publication from Pew Research is being referenced? Who are these "others?" What does "large segments" mean precisely and what are population of Muslims are we even talking about? Quite obviously, this line is basically just the most vague language his people could come up as a way to use the name Pew Research in close proximity to the bullsh!t that follows — blatant conflation. Next line:

Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing "25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad" and 51% of those polled, "agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah."

The Center for Security Policy? Sounds legit right? Well it's not and neither was this "poll." The Center for Security Policy was founded by Frank Gaffney, who was a hawk from the Reagan years who despite his education and connections was forced out because he proved to be too much of an extremist and he's only gotten worse since then.

In some ways, he's like Pamela Gellar, but not stupid. Gaffney is one of the progenitors of the theory that there's an active conspiracy to impose Sharia law in the United States via Muslim Brotherhood infiltrators including Grover Norquist (yea, the tax pledge guy) — who he claims was turned a more than a decade ago — and other members of the board of CPAC, who banned him from attending in 2011. As CPAC Chairman David Keene said at the time:

Keene said in a statement that Gaffney "has become personally and tiresomely obsessed with his weird belief that anyone who doesn't agree with him on everything all the time or treat him with the respect and deference he believes is his due, must be either ignorant of the dangers we face or, in extreme case, dupes of the nation's enemies."

He's also been laughed at by sane people for his theory that the U.S. Missile Defense Agency's logo was created to show "official U.S. submission to Islam." I don't think he's in it for the money, but the money ain't half bad either. Not counting all of the merchandise he sells and book sales for timeless classics like Sha riah: The Threat To America, a Salon story from 2014 revealed:

Salon acquired a copy of the Center for Security Policy’s donor rolls, listing the organization’s biggest donors. And while far from providing the lion’s share of funding, six of the U.S.’ biggest aerospace and defense contractors are supporters of Gaffney’s organization.

The document, which details contributions to the Center for Security Policy during the 2013 tax year, includes donations from: Boeing ($25,000); General Dynamics ($15,000); Lockheed Martin ($15,000); Northrup Grumman ($5,000); Raytheon ($20,000); and General Electric ($5,000).

Enough about Gaffney though, there's no shortage of sources detailing his nuttiness (and profit motive) readily available to fill a dozen threads. The alleged poll itself is unbelievably bad, even as polls go. I say alleged because there's actually no evidence that it even happened. Purportedly it was an online opt-in poll of 600 American Muslims. I couldn't do a better job of detailing just flawed this garbage is than the folks at Georgetown's Bridge Initiative Team, so I'll just point you folks to their scathing critique.

I'll skip the statements definition of Shariah and comment on the quote from Trump that makes up the rest of the statement:

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

Allow me to translate: "Your media induced panic is so powerful that you won't question my bullsh!t sources. I'll appeal to the absolute worst in people to get elected."

Trump really is right. Islam has always desired Global Control. Here in America we are Americans that answer only to American Law. If you live in America you are American. it can be no other way

originally posted by: SPECULUM
Trump really is right. Islam has always desired Global Control. Here in America we are Americans that answer only to American Law. If you live in America you are American. it can be no other way

Agreed, come to America, become American.

Or leave, don't let the door hit ya....

a reply to: SPECULUM

Part of the greatness of being an American is having the freedom to believe what you want.

Excluding someone because of their faith is the definition of anti-American.

a reply to: rockintitz
Allowing enemy combatants, whose stated purpose is to overthrow the United States and the constitution, to invade and kill citizens is anti-American.

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

Assuming that someone is an enemy combatant because they believe in a certain religion is anti-American.

But hell, maybe I'm biased. I tend to root for freedom in the freedom vs security debate.

a reply to: rockintitz

So if only Hitler had made up some bs about being a prophet, then the US would have been required to allow nazi immigration, even after they already declared war on us?

I don't think so.

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

What? First of all America imported nazis after WW2.

Second:

Godwin's Law

How can you justify restricting someone's rights based on their religion?

Do you think Japanese internment was a good idea?

a reply to: rockintitz

Because Islam is a savage political system thinly veiled as a "religion".

They believe allahs words are only law and the Quran is the infallible word of Allah.

Everywhere these savages have succeeded in thier duty to conquer and implement their brutal sharia law is a dictatorship rife with gross human rights rights violations and unimaginable cruelty.

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

Everywhere these savages have succeeded in thier duty to conquer and implement their brutal sharia law is a dictatorship rife with gross human rights rights violations and unimaginable cruelty.

Say again? So you're saying this has happened already?

False.

Plenty of muslim folks already live here. Should we deport them? Maybe just make them live in camps until this never ending war on terror is over?

What if it were you?

If I thought for a second that sharia law could be implemented in the US I wouldn't bother waiting for the governments response.

You judge someone as guilty based on what they could potentially do. That is thought crime. You and me are all potentially guilty.

originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

What? First of all America imported nazis after WW2.

Second:

Godwin's Law

How can you justify restricting someone's rights based on their religion?

Do you think Japanese internment was a good idea?

Wow talk about straw man arguments what does the Japanese internment have to do with not allowing them to enter the country. I think the real question we need to ask is just how many Muslims could be considered radical. I know in pew research 13 percent thought it was ok to use terrorism in defense of islam. Small number really when you think about it until we deal with large numbers for example have a million Muslims in your country. That means 130000 could use terrorism since its not against their personal beliefs. Now that's a scary number considering all it takes is 1 with a gun to cause mass panic.

Now the other part is it fear is it fair to penalize the 87 percent of Muslims that think it should never be used?? And how do you tell the difference between the two. It's very tough to decide what the right call is. The answers will be hard going forward and some tough decisions will need to be made. I guess the only way to answer the questions an what to do will depend on what happens in the future.

a reply to: dragonridr

Wow talk about straw man arguments what does the Japanese internment have to do with not allowing them to enter the country.

Seriously?

Labeling millions of people based on the actions of a few individuals.

Perfect analogy if you ask me.

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
a reply to: rockintitz

Because Islam is a savage political system thinly veiled as a "religion".

They believe allahs words are only law and the Quran is the infallible word of Allah.

Everywhere these savages have succeeded in thier duty to conquer and implement their brutal sharia law is a dictatorship rife with gross human rights rights violations and unimaginable cruelty.

I've been reading alot of this sentiment (all muslims = bad) coming from the US recently.

It amazes me how you manage to believe in "moderate freedom-fighters" (FYI: also muslims) in Syria at the same time, furthermore giving your Gov. permission to stick their noses into middle-eastern affairs... which created the refugee-crisis in the first place!

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
a reply to: rockintitz

Because Islam is a savage political system thinly veiled as a "religion".

They believe allahs words are only law and the Quran is the infallible word of Allah.

Everywhere these savages have succeeded in thier duty to conquer and implement their brutal sharia law is a dictatorship rife with gross human rights rights violations and unimaginable cruelty.

Id say the number of Muslims that want to impose Sharia law in the us is extremely Iow. Realize that In Western countries most Muslims enjoy the freedom they get it they aren't stupid and realize its not as restrictive. But many polls include countries that already have Shari a so I'm betting the numbers are unreliable

originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

What? First of all America imported nazis after WW2.

Second:

Godwin's Law

How can you justify restricting someone's rights based on their religion?

Do you think Japanese internment was a good idea?

It actually was a good idea. Do you honestly think the IJN set sail for Pearl Harbor on a whim and hoped the fleet would be there when they eventually arrived? No. They had spies. Our internment camps were no where near as bad as Nazi or Japanese camps. The families stayed together, got three meals a day and the children continued with their schooling throughout.

Trump does not say that his proposed idea for a ban is permanent.

If a city water system is full of lethal bacteria that is killing people, wouldn't it be prudent to temporarily stop the flow, carefully evaluate the situation and replace the filtration system that allowed contaminants through?

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Do you honestly think the IJN set sail for Pearl Harbor on a whim and hoped the fleet would be there when they eventually arrived? No.

You're right.

All nations have spies. We should assume everyone here is a spy.

Based on their skin color/nationality/religious affiliation

Apart from anything else, quite unworkable because of the problem of proving that the immigrant/tourist is a Muslim.
Of course they would deny it if a ban was in place. Even if they hold the passport of "a Muslim country", they can claim to belong to a minority group, or they can claim to be covert atheists.
I understand that tourists have been asked for years if they have any intention of overthrowing the government of the United States. Presumably whoever did 9/11 signed the same denial. I don't suppose anyone ever said "Yes" (apart from the philosopher Bertrand Russell, who paid for it by spending several days explaining the British sense of humour to immigration officials).

Obama and the democrats are guilty of negligence for being fully aware that the visa system is seriously flawed yet they failed to temporarily halt all visas until it was fixed.

And they are implementing a special biometric database for refugees and visitors -gasp! Trump was lambasted for proposing a database.

This article is dated several weeks before thier negligence resulted in a massacre that should have been prevented.

The United Nations on Friday appealed to the US to admit Syrian refugees cleared by security checks. However, Congress and many governors say Islamic State terrorists will try to slip into the country posing as innocents.

Meanwhile, also on Thursday, Senate Democrats proposed that only biometric passport holders be allowed to enter the country.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is drafting legislation to require in-person interviews at a U.S. embassy and that all travellers from those so-called visa-waiver countries would be required to have passports with biometric information such as fingerprints.

Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash also wants to check a traveller’s background against watch lists using the biometric identification before the traveller arrives in the US, reports USA Today.

- See more at: www.planetbiometrics.com...

You know the funny thing is that the same people that are praising trump for wanting to round up Muslims are the same people that say Obama is building FEMA camps to use as concentration camps for white Christian gun owners 😂