Why NOT stop Muslims from entering the US?

a reply to: stolencar18

Interesting point.

Would bestowing US Constitutional rights on a citizen of another country be considered western imperialism?

a reply to: stolencar18

No worries, thanks for the reply.

Noone in America is safe and that has nothing to do with Muslims and everything to do with the NRA and your gun violence.

You talk about the children, someone here has already given you the stats on how many children are killed each year in America, and it has nothing to do with Muslims.

How do you propose to 'have a closer look at things' in regards to Muslims?

originally posted by: dreamingawake

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: dreamingawake
The problem here is that it won't stop criminals-terrorists who will find a way around any rules to that. Then you would have those stated these rules to take it one step further to a racial connotation. Then you have to ask where it ends. Should history repeat itself? Interment camps for Japanese Americans wasn't exactly a strong point for the US as neither were the internment camps for Ukrainians deemed "enemy aliens" in Canada during WWII.

Still, it makes it tougher for them. Nothing will stop it completely.

For what percentage would it make it tougher as we just don't know that? That's still grouping all Muslims into that, banning all of them from entering as mentioned in the OP.

Having the innocent refugees who may have a better place to live in the US rejected from entering won't stop those that are already being radicalized from "the inside out", some with prior links to the ME, some with newer influence. Even without the SB shooter's wife with him, he may still have acted out, as he was radicalized before hand.

Therefore do nothing to stop further incursion into the U.S. via refugees? Sorry. I can't go for that.

It is a privilege to come to the U.S.. We have every right to ensure those are assets. Not their fault there are terrorists amongst them. Not our fault either. Add in cost, lack of jobs, et al, then the scale tips against it. Apparently, the majority agree.

Help them with monies or food and housing overseas. Let them in on a trickle basis when each is fully vetted.

if you decide who can get in based on religion, you just violated a key provision of the Bill of Rights

The bill of rights is for American citizens isn't it?

Why do people believe that people from other countries should have the same or more rights in America than American citizens?

I say end all immigration, or at least set it at a rate that won't increase our population so we don't run out of resources and have gridlock coast to coast.

And keep terrorists out.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Get out of here with your sensible post. This isn't the forum for that!

I liked it, by the way.

Thanks. I'm trying to stay out of these threads because the whole premise is too irrational to take seriously. But the political climate has become so irrational that this has become a "legit" topic.

I don't blame you in the least. If people are willing to support a revocation of the constitutions stand on freedom of religion, they may as well surrender their guns too.

Hell throw the whole document out the window, and just adopt the fascist mentality the Nazis started with in the 1930s.

Fascists are alive and well in the good oil U S of A.

originally posted by: stolencar18
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Scapegoated? Really?

I'll go as far as conceding that MOST Muslims are great people.

I disagree that Muslims are being scapegoated. Everyone knows that it's a small percentage of Muslims that need to be stopped. The problem is we can't easily separate them out right now, so the only solutions are:
1. Let them all in and cross our fingers
2. Stop them all and control the flow inwards, doing our best to stop them before they come in, even if it inconveniences some of the good ones.

I'm not saying Islam is bad, but I do think more people in the Muslim world need to step up and stand up against the extremists.

Then why not focus on stopping extremism? That's like me saying "I know Christianity & Athism aren't bad, but I do think more people in the Christian & Atheist communties need to step up and stand up against their thieves, child abusers, murders, rapists, wife beaters (and husband beaters)".

Muslims like myself have been pointing towards Wahhabism this entire time. They're the ones pushing this violent crap. In fact, it's not even all Wahhabis; it's an extreme branch of them that other Wahhabis call "Kharijites". It just so happens that they very powerful in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other parts of the GCC. Extremism will never end as long as the West keeps giving them massive defense contracts, protecting their administrations with our military bases, and accepting their massive investments in our industries.

So we can start fighting terrorism with an arms embargo on the GCC until they clean up their own crap, & personal sanctions on the powerbrokers & weapons dealers who support terrorists. That's the type of program we can do that will use temporary vetting until they're proven innocent.

But in all honesty, our countries aren't even really trying to end terrorism. If we were, groups like Anonymous wouldn't have to take down ISIS social media accounts because our companies would ban them. Think about it: We can't upload a video of copyrighted material without getting our online accounts shut down, but they can upload & promote beheadings & get front page media coverage? If you were a private company, how many millions of dollars would you have to spend in advertising to get the prime time coverage ISIS gets for free?

Most kids today don't have a clue what the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" is, because our society has made it a point not to promote it. But our supposed #1 enemy gets their promotional videos shown for free on virtually every major network and/or website? Come on now.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Then get rid of them. Why do you allow them to have so much free reign that they basically took what used to be a bastion of modern and moderate Islam - Indonesia - and more or less radicalize it by leaps and bounds?

If you know the problem if Wahhabism a the Salafis, then why are you letting their imams come into your mosques and teach all around the world? One would think you'd simply say, "Thank, but no thanks."

It would be like the Protestant Christian world more or less saying, "We don't trust Catholicism and its doctrines and priests, but sure, send us that priest and we'll let him take over our pulpit and start preaching his version of Christianity and give Mass and confession." And then we turn around and wonder when people think we're no different than Catholics and our children begin to attend confession and revere the Pope.

originally posted by: sosobad

When was the last time the KKK or Christians for that matter beheaded someone on video?

When was the last time the KKK or Christians for that matter burned people alive on video?

When was the last time the KKK or Christians for that matter slaughtered entire regions because the natives would not bow to their will?

Your analogy fails so so bad.

originally posted by: PresidentCamacho

originally posted by: sosobad

When was the last time the KKK or Christians for that matter beheaded someone on video?

When was the last time the KKK or Christians for that matter burned people alive on video?

When was the last time the KKK or Christians for that matter slaughtered entire regions because the natives would not bow to their will?

Your analogy fails so so bad.

Disingenuous. The KKK predates video. If you want though you can Google image search "KKK Hangings" and that crap is pretty nasty. I won't link it.

ETA: When? Looks within my lifetime.

a reply to: intrepid

Kinda scary, never thought I'd see someone on ATS actually defending the KKK and portraying them as non-violent / non- extremists.

I chuckled.

a reply to: stolencar18

I see you have still NOT answered a question you have been asked several times so I will ask again.......How do you propose identifying people whom are Muslim ?

a reply to: intrepid

So what maybe 10 at most atrocities committed by the KKK in your life time equates to 1000's committed by ISIS in the name of Islam in the past decade?

Fail.

And people fall for it every time.

a reply to: PresidentCamacho

Here's the thing:

I don't think ISIS is representative of Muslims, but I do think they move among the Muslim population because there is a second group of Muslims no one talks about - the Muslim sympathizers. I am talking about that proportion of the Muslim population that doesn't engage in terrorist tactics, but actively sympathizes with those groups, enough to succor them even just by turning a blind eye here and there.

In poll after poll, that population is anywhere from 30 to 50% of the Muslims polled.

So really, we need to be concerned with two groups when we talk about screening: the terrorists and their sympathizers. One facilitates the other.

I would also mention that when it comes up, the Revolution was successful not because the colonists as a large body rose up. The actual army was a small minority, but they succeeded in no small part because they had the support of a significant percentage of the colonial population. People who sympathized with their aims and abetted even if they only looked the other way.

So I wonder why we ought to go out of our way to import two groups of people, one who wants to overthrow this country and will actively work toward it violently, and the other who will lend aid and support? Are we trying to have ourselves overthrown?

originally posted by: PresidentCamacho
a reply to: intrepid

So what maybe 10 at most atrocities committed by the KKK in your life time equates to 1000's committed by ISIS in the name of Islam in the past decade?

Fail.

You're not really Mr. Current Events are you? ISIS has only been active for about 3-4 years. You want to check the rest of your facts? Fail? Uh huh.

a reply to: intrepid

I was being generous and giving you an extra 5 years there to help improve your odds and there still is no comparison, Mr. Hand over eyes and fingers in ears.


You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

Abraham Lincoln

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: stolencar18

I see you have still NOT answered a question you have been asked several times so I will ask again.......How do you propose identifying people whom are Muslim ?

Do what the Saudis do and have done for quite some time. Ask the religion on the application.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: PresidentCamacho
a reply to: intrepid

So what maybe 10 at most atrocities committed by the KKK in your life time equates to 1000's committed by ISIS in the name of Islam in the past decade?

Fail.

You're not really Mr. Current Events are you? ISIS has only been active for about 3-4 years. You want to check the rest of your facts? Fail? Uh huh.

Why let facts get in the way of a good story

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: PresidentCamacho
a reply to: intrepid

So what maybe 10 at most atrocities committed by the KKK in your life time equates to 1000's committed by ISIS in the name of Islam in the past decade?

Fail.

You're not really Mr. Current Events are you? ISIS has only been active for about 3-4 years. You want to check the rest of your facts? Fail? Uh huh.

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or simply Islamic State, is a Wahhabi/Salafi jihadist Islamic extremist militant group. Wikipedia
Founder: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
Founded: 1999

Mr Current Events I think you need to check your facts.

a reply to: stolencar18

Works for me. When every single official that would know admits that they cannot possibly vet all of these claimed refugees, and that there is no way currently to know who is and isn't "radicalized", then halting immigration and travel from that section of people is the only logical recourse. No sane or responsible government wants to ring in people that are a danger to their nation.

Besides, from what I have been able to gather, immigration laws prohibit any who would want to overthrow our system of government - ISLAM, BY LAW IS PROHIBITED FROM US IMMIGRATION

When Muslims on the street are asked if they want our laws or sharia and they all answer sharia, seems clear enough to me! Sharia law is incompatible with United States law.