Trump's Proposal: Temporarily Stop Islamic entry into the U.S.

JEFFHEAD.COM ^ | December 9, 2015 | Jeff Head

[Jeff Head]

Donald Trump's Proposal on a Temporary Halt to Islamic Entry into the U.S.

Watching the MSM, the DNC and their candidates, the GOPe and their pundits, and others go after Trump over his announcement about not allowing Muslims from outside the country to come in until we learn how to better vet them has been interesting...and almost entertaining if it were not so serious.

Consider this...if Trump's policy had been seriously instituted we would defintiely have not had the San Bernardino Terror couple kill 14 innoncent Americans last week.

We would not have had the Boston Marathon bombing.

Heck...we would not have had the 911 terrorist killers in the country either.

The terrorists would did these things would not have been in the U.S. under Trump's proposal

Trump has not said he intends to make Islam illegal in the United states. He has not proposed any political, housing, employment, benefit, or service related tests or discrimination against Muslim Americans. He has simply stated that bringing Muslims in from outside the country needs to be stopped until we understand better how to vet those coming in and determine better which ones want to kill us, and which ones want to come here to actually be Americans. We need to keep in mind in this that the Islamic principle of Taqiyya applies to those comeing in. They are taught to lie openly if they feel it will advance Islamic goals and plans. So the vetting process has to be much more than casual questions of the entrants.

There is nothing illegal, unconstituional, or wrong with wanting to get a handle on this and proposing specific things that will enable us to do so. The US Constitution prohibits any religous test on those running for office, or working for the government. Article Six, PAragrpah Three states, "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States>" So, claims that this proposal violates that clause are simply misguided at best...and knowingly mis-interpreting it at worst.

A big part of our problem right now is so much PC garbage that our own politicians are unwilling to speak straight or propose real solutions for fear of offending someone. That type of behavior and attitude gets us San Bernardinos. The US has the right to determine how and what it does for its immigrants and refugee policy.

Over 75% of Syrian "refugees" are young men of fighting age.

We have absolute killers, Islamic Terrorists and Jihadists who are at war with the United States and any western style, secular society. They have been for decades. They have been getting into our country and killing our people. These terrorists have told us. straight up, that they will infiltrate immigrants and refugees.

As regards the large number of Syrian refugees in Europe, and that this administration insists we bring in here...we already know that the terrorists did infitrate and committt terror and murder in Paris. Do we want that here? Trump's proposal will prevent it.

We should to be able to vet those coming into our nation and understand who they are. If we cannot, we should not allow any of them in until we do.

Sharia Law is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.

My own preference for a starting point in the vetting of Islamic immigrants or refugees would be simple. Sharia Law. If an individual espouses Sharia Law, they should not be allowed in. Sharia Law is a governance system. It tells people how to live their life and then proscribes punshment and action to take if they do not. It has its own court/judicial system to resolve differneces in day to day living issues. The solutions do not just deal with their status as a member of their religion. It is wholly incompatible with the U.S. Constitution and our American values, culture, and way of life.

Of course, any one of them associated with or affiliated with radical Islam and terorists should not be considered or allowed in either. The wife of Syed Farook who helped him kill Americans in San Bernardino last week, was such an individual. Pakistan has told us that she was a member of the Red Mosque and associated with the radical cleric there in Pakistan before. They jnew this. Yet our own state Depatment approved of and issued her a visa last year to come here as Sayed's wife. Do you think perhjaps people like this are taking advantage of a porous system that exists under this administration? Of course they are.

In fact, IMHO, if a Mosque in the US teaches Sharia Law as a way to live and resolve non-religious differences (which Sharia Law does), that Mosque should lose its religious classification and be shut down. If an American citizens espouses Sharia Law, they should either give it up or be deported. Anyone who wants to join and affiliate with ISIS or Al Queada right now is either arrested or deported, losing their US citizenship. IMHO, Sharia Law is one of the root issues that lead to racialization. But that's just my opinion.

I know this, if Sharia Law were ver fully implemmented (and fuindamental Islamics want it implemented world-wide), kiss the Constitution and your liberty goodby...freedom of speech, freedom of religion, a free press, gunrights, etc. would all end as we know them.

What Trump has proposed for immigrants and refugees makes perfect sense for the short term until we have a viable vetting system to keep the killers out. He has raised the issue...he has the guts and detrmination to do so, despite the ensuing political and media strom over it. Good for him. People everywhere now are talking about it, and that is a good thing.

Would you drink water laced with Arsenic?

Let's say you find that the water well on which you depend for the water in your home was found to have arsenic in it. You find that there is a one in one hundred chance that if you drink the water coming into your home, that you will either get terribly sick, or die. what would you do? would you continue to pump that wayter into your home and use it? Wash in it? Drink it? Of course not. You would stop using it until you had put a fliter on it that was rpven to take out the posion, or found an entirely new source. Then, you would regularly check the water for a long time to be sure that you were not taking poison into your home that could kill, or seriously injure you or your family. You would do this depsite the fact that 99% of the water was good.

Trumpp is proposing that we filter the stream coning into this country until we are sure we can keep those put who would kill or seriously injure us.

Jeff Head
Idaho, USA
December 2015

See also thje following links and "stright talk" messages to all Americans:

My Message on Islamic Terrorism

The Boston Marathon Terror Bombing

Sharia Law must be outlawed in the United States

Fast & Furios and the Obama Administration

Mass Shootings and Gun Control

Black and Latino Americans: For God's Sake Wake Up!

Ferguson Missouri and False Narratives

Secure our Southern Border

My Oath to the Constitution as a US Citizen

[Lazamataz]

Well stated, Jeff. You made a perfect case.

[Original Lurker]

Shut down muslim immigration 100% and begin an immediate process of expulsion of those muslims even remotely, REMOTELY connected with jihadi. Even the MOST REMOTE CONNECTION.

I would further this by cutting off ALL welfare to immigrants,,. PERIOD!!!

[joshua c]

I like the well water analogy but he left out an important point.

The Obama administration is making you drink the unfiltered water.

[Ouderkirk]

Read Matt Brackens post at Gates of Vienna.

Tet Take Two.

http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/11/tet-take-two-islams-2016-european-offensive/

This is simply the most likely event for the foreseeable future.

[knarf]

Most of us have filters we use to digest information

My pastor can take an ordinary conversation or simple greeting and respond with scripture and a reason why he responded that way .. for instance

We all know these people ... some are very good friends BECAUSE they filter data through THEIR particular filter ... and we are grateful for their input

Donald trump's filter is idealistic, Norman Rockwellian with the added dash of pompous bravado usually associated with an arrogant American in a foreign land in the 1950's

We who remember that style of man ... and those that desire that style of man are naturally drawn to him BECAUSE of how he filters information ... and we are grateful for his input

[Jeff Head]

Finally, Laz, last but not least, there is this, which is part of the United States Code of Laws:

8 US Code 1182

Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

That pretty much is game, set, match regarding this issue. It never was an issue.

[Jeff Head]

Yes...my friend...it is so.

Read my Post 26

...in response to Laz. The issue never was an issue. Trump had it right the whole time...and I am sure he knows it.

[21twelve]

I wonder what the response on Facebook (or DU) would be if someone posted that law, but said that it was a PROPOSED law by Trump or Cruz?

Well - I guess I know what the response would be, but would still be fun to watch their heads explode. Maybe I’ll just try it at home where my wife and one daughter thinks Trump has gone too far. The other daughter and myself ponder the idea.

[Jeff Head]

Hehehe...I’ll by some popcorn, particularly in anticipation of your letting it go on a while, and then finally posting that it is already existing law!

LOL!

[DaveA37]

All of the media BS neglected to include the word “Temporary” when they jumped all over Trump for what he said. I believe he was only restating what someone else (not sure who that was) had stated earlier but the media dumped it all of Trump.

[Paladin2]

Let Traitor Roberts decide is Islam is Sedition or not.

[Delta 21]

Eagles Up !!

[TigersEye]

Let Congress declare that Islam is not a religion and SCOTUS can pound sand.

[tet68]

Good post Jeff.
I find it interesting that so many times Trump’s words
are blown all out of proportion to find out later
that there is a lot of sense to what he says.

I am a Cruz supporter as I feel he has a much fuller
grasp of the Constitutional aspects of governance.
Trump’s manner can be so overwhelming at times but
perhaps that is what is needed to roll back the
road to serfdom.

Glad you are doing ok.
t.

[Lazamataz]

Oh, I know. I even posted the thread.

[Mister Da]

“If an individual espouses Sharia Law, they should not be allowed in.”

This pretty much closes the door to anyone from Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, & other countries governed by Sharia Law.

People from these countries know little or nothing about democracy & the rule of secular law. Sharia is the only law they know. To them, all other legal systems are corrupt.

Asking them to deny the only legal system they know is not gonna happen unless they lie - taqiyya. So, why bother asking them at all?

Bottom line for me: Mass immigration of people with a ideology totally foreign to US law & customs is a recipe for national legal, cultural suicide. If you are unsure of the consequences, ask any Native American.

The best, least objectionable solution is to block or make near impossible immigration from select countries: Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, Qatar, & several others. Tell these countries that immigration will resume when they make substantial legal & religious reforms. Allow in only those who have credible US sponsors & hold the sponsors legally accountable for the actions of the immigrants for a period of years.

[Gritty]

Spot on, Jeff!

If anybody doubts it, they should simply look at the past 1400 years of mayhem and murder perpetrated by the followers of Mohammad on their unfortunate neighbors. There is nothing "peaceful" about them now and there never has been.

The only peaceful or tolerant Muslim is one who is either an apostate or one who does not follow the clear teachings of the Koran and other Muslim scriptures. In other words, one who is not a "true" Muslim. The more religious they are in following Mohammad, the more they are apt to cut your throat.

[SamAdams76]

Very well done. Thank you.

[Roman_War_Criminal]

The Founders flawed and should have put a cultural clause with regards to who comes in.

We’ve been paying the price in blood for “diversity” as has every foolish nation that has tolerated foreigners in the past.

[Jeff Head]

Thans SA76,

Just to reiterarte the one very salint point:

Regarding the proposal by Trump to temporarily halt all Islamic entry into the United States, there is a lot of hype, misinformation, ignorance, and out and out lies being circulated in an attempt to slam Trump.

So, what is the truth of the matter? Is Trump's proposal illegal? Is his proposal un-Constitutional? Is his proposal un-American?

8 US Code 1182 (Section a. Number 10, Paragraph f.)

Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

This is in the U.S. Code of Laws. It was passed by Congress in 1952 and has been the law of the land ever since. And, by the way, at the time it was passed by a Democratic Congress.

So, to be clear, if the President determines that murders/killers/enemies are infiltrating any group of people to do harm to America, he has been given the power by Congress to stop or restrict that groups immigration or non-immigration status and ability to come into the country by proclamation. This is precisely what Trump has proposed…and for obvious reasons.

It is NOT un-American, it is U.S. Law.

It is NOT un-Constitutional, Article 6 Paragraph 3 of the U.S. Constitution regarding no religious test refers specifically and only to the election of Congress...not to immigration.

As President, Donald Trump would have full legal authority under U.S. Law to do exactly what he has proposed.

All of the hype, outrage, and statements to the contrary are either political grandstanding, abject ignorance of the law, or willful lies regarding the issue.