Posted on 12/08/2015 8:56:22 AM PST by VinL
GOP presidential contender Ted Cruz said Tuesday that he disagrees with rival Donald J. Trump's plan to ban Muslims from coming into the United States until the federal government can ensure that those coming into the nation do not pose a threat to the country.
"I do not agree with his proposal," the Texas senator said at a press conference on Capitol Hill. “I do not think it is the right solution.â€
Mr. Cruz said that some have encouraged him to criticize Mr. Trump, but said he will not to so. Instead, he said he is pushing solutions aimed at putting a three year moratorium on refugees from Syria and Iraq, and giving governors more power to stop refugees from being resettled in their states.
Mr. Trump has tangled with most of the candidates in the GOP field ..with the exception of Mr. Cruz .. though he warned at a rally in South Carolina that he will respond in kind if Mr. Cruz attacks him.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
My thought, too. Cruz just lost some supporters to Trump with that comment.
Of course not. But it would prevent the entry of any infiltrators known to be present in the group of refugees that are an immediate concern.
And, secondly, limiting the banned countries to the two o immediate concern increases the chance of passage. A comprehensive list of all risky countries wouldn't have any chance of surviving a Democrat filibuster.
And if we include nations with an ISIS presence we inadvertently include our own allies.
As I noted earlier in a post concerning French Muslims, we have to trust our allies to vet their own citizens. If we didn't honor a French passport -- Muslim or not -- we'd run the risk of retaliation against American passport holders. Or trade.
In other words, we'd be playing with diplomatic fire. Imagine how we'd respond if one of our allies refused entry to an American citizen because he was black.
Those others got whooped into behaving, like Islam’s going to have to be.
you mean like the SB shooter guy who murdered 14 Americans ?
Until he committed an act that gave probable cause for detaining him or otherwise restricting his activities and movements, what basis would you use for doing so? His religious affiliation? Where were the dots to connect to prevent this act? Nothing short of an unconstitutional ban, round-up, detention, etc. of all openly professed muslims (not just immigrants and refugees but existing American citizens) would have stopped this guy; is that what you are advocating?
If so, you have crossed Ben Franklin's line of those who would trade essential liberty for a little bit of security, and as Sam Adams would say, may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
Cruz is trying to avoid the Islamaphobe tag.
I personally think he is making a very bad mistake and he is still going to be labled as one anyway.
The point is we need to shut down all immigration for the forseeable future.
Immigration hasn’t been for the best interests of THIS country for 2 generations now.
That congress refuses to see what the electorate sees only means big trouble ahead.
I think he is wisely trying to avoid the Trump-nutcase tag.
LOL.
His mettle was tested. And you can see the results.
I believe that the SB shooters could have tracked-monitored electronically ... especially after their destination countries of choice ...
My statement was to tactics, a person or class of persons holding a treason ideology may well be bared entry to the united states. If following sharia law fits that so be it. I and Cruz I think are only changing the method not the effect.
The banishment of Islam happened all over Europe, beginning in the 11th century Italy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Islam_in_southern_Italy
I said nothing of the Reconquista or the Jews. It is totally irresponsible and without proportion to present a moral equivalence defense of Islamic conquests based upon a 16th century persecution of Iberian Jews by the Jesuits. It has no factual merit to counter the expulsion of Islam and is nothing less than simplistic demagoguery.
The repetitive expulsion of Islam from Western nations is based upon:
“Muslim conquest of Kerman
391; Ṭabari, I, p. 2,863; tr., XV, p. 69) Baloch and Balochistan, Naseer Dashti THE ARAB CONQUEST, B. A. Litvinsky, A. H. Jalilov and A. I. Kolesnikov
2 KB (254 words) - 22:13, 17 January 2015
Muslim conquest of Northern Persia
lieutenants of the caliph Umar and his successors where the conquest was including Tabaristan, Azerbaijan and Armenia. in later era it became the capital of the
2 KB (219 words) - 09:38, 22 April 2015
Muslim conquest of Persia
The Muslim conquest of Persia, also known as the Arab conquest of Iran led to the end of the Sasanian Empire in 651 and the eventual decline of the Zoroastrian
76 KB (9,776 words) - 10:49, 2 December 2015
Umayyad conquest of Hispania
Iberia, or al-Andalus (756–788). The conquest marks the westernmost expansion of both the Umayyad Caliphate and Muslim rule into Europe. Forces commanded
27 KB (3,673 words) - 05:59, 16 November 2015
Muslim conquest of Fars
The Muslim conquest of Fars took place from 638/9 to 650/1, and ended with subjugation of the important Fars Province to the Rashidun Caliphate. The
6 KB (708 words) - 17:18, 1 May 2015
Muta of Dailam
Muslim conquest of Persia. His army, was, however, defeated and he was killed by the army of Nu’man. The History of al-Tabari Vol. 14: The Conquest of Iran
1 KB (118 words) - 15:08, 28 November 2015
Muslim conquest of Azerbaijan
years of 22 Hijr, After the conquest of Rayy and Central Persia, Umar ordered the conquest of Azarbaijan. The Rashidun Caliphate continued the conquest towards
5 KB (651 words) - 23:07, 7 October 2015
Muslim conquest of Sistan
Abdulrehman ibn Sumra to undertake the operation. Abdur Rahman b Sumra led the Muslim forces to Sistan and after crossing the frontier and overcoming resistance
2 KB (273 words) - 22:42, 9 March 2015
Muslim conquest of the Maghreb
The Muslim conquest of North Africa continued the century of rapid Arab Muslim military expansion following the death of Muhammad in 632 AD. By 642, the
21 KB (2,826 words) - 01:39, 6 December 2015
Battle of Istakhr (650-653)
while Yazdegerd III fled to Kerman. Thus ended the Muslim conquest of Fars, however the series of revolt still haunt this town until it was pacified for
998 bytes (119 words) - 02:30, 18 January 2015
Arab conquest of Armenia
The Arab conquest of Armenia was a part of the Muslim conquests after the death of Muhammad in 632 CE. Persian Armenia had fallen to the Arab Rashidun
7 KB (795 words) - 07:18, 17 November 2015
Isfandyadh (category Muslim conquest of Persia)
is mentioned as the prince of Adurbadagan, who at the head of an big army along with Muta and Varaztirots, fought the Muslim Arabs at Waj Rudh, a village
3 KB (279 words) - 16:41, 6 December 2015
Mardanshah (category Muslim conquest of Persia)
the “owner of bushy eyebrows” as was Bahman Jadhuyih. Battle of Muzayyah Battle of the Bridge Islamic conquest of Iran Muslim conquests Sassanid Empire
1 KB (47 words) - 15:18, 28 November 2015
Battle of Hira
Battle of Hira was fought between the Sasanians and the Rashidun Caliphate in 633. It was one of the early battles of the Muslim conquest of Persia.
3 KB (368 words) - 18:08, 27 November 2014
Shahrvaraz Jadhuyih (category Muslim conquest of Persia)
Parvaneh (2008). Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran. London and New York: I.B. Tauris
1 KB (86 words) - 15:08, 28 November 2015
Muslim conquest of the Levant
The Muslim conquest of Syria (Arabic: الÙØªØ Ø§Ù„Ø¥Ø³Ù„Ø§Ù…ÙŠ لبلاد الشام) occurred in the first half of the 7th century, and refers to the conquest of region known
43 KB (5,923 words) - 07:17, 17 November 2015
Siege of Alexandria (641)
provinces of Byzantine Africa. Following Muslim conquest, the local populace and political infrastructure was left largely intact, albeit under Muslim control
16 KB (2,444 words) - 06:11, 22 September 2015
Hormozd Jadhuyih (category Muslim conquest of Persia)
Battle of Firaz. Pourshariati, Parvaneh (2008). Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran
1 KB (112 words) - 15:07, 28 November 2015
Islamization of the Sudan region
states.[citation needed] Following the 8th-century Muslim conquest of North Africa, Arab Muslims began leading expeditions into Sub-Saharan Africa -
14 KB (2,057 words) - 07:39, 19 November 2015
Battle of Waj Rudh
Parvaneh (2008). Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran. London and New York: I.B. Tauris
2 KB (103 words) - 22:05, 5 January 2015
View (previous 20 | next 20) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)
You’re not going to start calling Ted Cruz by his full birth name now too, are you? It’s really weird, isn’t it? I simply don’t understand why anyone would call Ted Cruz by his full name, something that’s not done for other candidates.
*Something* must motivate dragnet2 to do so in the case of Ted Cruz. Just trying to understand his motivations for always using Ted Cruz’s full birthname rather than the name *everyone* else calls him.
Unless I hear otherwise, we’ll have to conclude that dragnet2 is just playing some anti-hispanic game, and wants everyone to know that “Ted” is actually “Rafael.” Fear the hispanic, I guess. OK.
Honestly, do you really think Ted Cruz *wants* to make it easy for bad-intentioned Muslims to enter our country? Really?
So, because Ted Cruz didn’t make a sweeping statement about keeping *all* Muslims out of our nation, he’s 100% the bad guy?
It’s called cognitive dissonance. Yes, it does strike me as very odd that you call Ted Cruz something that *nobody* else on FR does. Makes me wonder if you’re anti-hispanic. Guess you are, unless you explain why you make a big deal of “Rafael.”
So referring to him or anyone by their actual name is now considered a racist act by you?
Why am I not surprised by what you just revealed Theo?
See Japanese internment. We won that war. Time to start fighting modern wars in the same way again if we ever want to win another. The Constitution is not a suicide pact.
I couldn't agree more.
When in doubt, Ted lands in the middle ground. Safe, but not the bold leadership we need to turn the f’ing queen Mary on a dime.
Would liberals support unrestricted immigration from professed KKK members?
So let's see: The first amendment (at least the free exercise part) can be disregarded for the purpose of barring US citizens from returning from abroad to this country; The fourth amendment right to be secure in one's personal property and effects without probable cause can be cast aside based on one's choice of travel destination; I guess it's not a stretch to presume you also support gutting the fifth amendment's protection of private property to allow the government to confiscate real estate from private owners to turn over to billionaires so they can build casinos and hotels. Your conservative Trump likes that arrangement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.