The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Trump Calls for Moratorium on Muslim Immigration "Until Our Country's Representatives Can Figure Out What Is Going On"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From a Trump campaign press release:

DONALD J. TRUMP STATEMENT ON PREVENTING MUSLIM IMMIGRATION

(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.

 
Hide 266 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. God bless this man. I hope enough people can denounce him in polite circles, but vote for him secretly. Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.

    • Agree: JohnnyWalker123
    • Replies: @H2
    It's like Invasion of the Bodysnatchers. I know some fellow Trump supporters but we only speak about it to each other.
    , @Hail
    Michael Barone had a column this week berating Trump. In it he comments:

    Trump has consistently run better in polls conducted by automated phone calls and over the Internet (29 percent) than in live-interview polls (23 percent).
     
    It would seem that one fifth of Trump supporters feel social pressure to keep their mouths shut when they have to confess their support to a real human, even if just over the phone. The effect may be even stronger than that, as some may not admit to being pro-Trump even in more-anonymous-seeming polls.

    (Barone's alternative theory: Non-live-interview polls are rigged by Trumpbots.)

    , @Eric
    Fortunately, the list of things that can cause "social death" in elite circles is getting so long it is inevitably only a matter of time before that elite finds themselves surrounded by enemies of their own creation who will show them no mercy.
    After all, they're already starting to eat their own.
    , @Wilkey
    I'm not exactly immune to the fear that people might think me an extremist or racist (I am using a pseudonym, after all) but if I had more faith in Trump I'd be perfectly willing to come right out and say it. I have serious doubts about him, though. I'm glad he's widening the range of acceptable political positions. I find it hard to believe he's all that sincere. But if he is the Republican nominee I'll support him proudly and openly.
    , @Gunnar von Cowtown

    Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.
     
    Dude, you need to start hanging out with a better class of people.
    , @e
    Eff "social death." That's what it takes. Your social circle now hates Harry Truman too.
  2. Wow. It’s like this Trump guy thinks that politicians should actually carry out the wishes of their constituents, rather than hectoring them about what ignorant retrograde racists they all are.

    That’s not how politics is done anymore. Is he mad?

  3. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I’m not even saying that “Islamism” and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship…. I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They’re the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you’ll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they’ve criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing – they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    " Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well."

    Really? Where are they.

    And if you think that Trump is a fascist, they you don't know what fascism is.

    You are an idiot.

    , @Hail

    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing.
     
    Except in Spain in 2004.

    (1) 2002-'03: Spain's center-right, pro-Bush government participates in Iraq Attaq.
    (2) March 11, 2004: Muslims bomb a train in Spain. 2,200 casualties, 191 fatal.
    (3) March 14, 2004: Spain has an election. Despite pre-bombing polls showing the conservatives with at least a ten-point lead, the Socialists have a shock great result, win 47% of seats outright (to the conservatives 42% of seats), and are able to lead the new government.
    (4) Circa March 15, 2004: Socialists announce Spain's immediate pull out of Iraq.

    Terrorism worked.

    , @PistolPete
    Go away..cuck...your days of running this once great country into the ground are over...I hear Germany is upholding your ideals..Consider moving there..Ciao
    , @yaqub the mad scientist
    Somewhere in the bowel movement that is the American media/academia complex, lots of people are laughing at how they've sold this "symbiotic relationship" you've imagined: a spectacle of false extremes that makes completely reasonable people have to choose between saying nothing or being branded a crypto-fascist, Islamophobe, Islamofascist, or whatever fascist flavor of the week they're pushing. There really is no middle ground allowed anymore, because the adults have left the room.

    It doesn't have to be this way. A simple return to pre 1964 Immigration Act, with the sensible vetting that any sane society does, would work just fine.

    You're either a troll or someone who's bought into this childish dichotomy of reasoned, open-minded, tolerant wise ones vs murderous knuckle draggers. Either way, grow up.

    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Barack, is that you? Or Loretta Lynch? Nah, not Lynch. Maybe Eric Holder is making a warm up for his $50k per speech in the upcoming years, with just a little red meat for all the leftist loonies out there. You know the kind. The ones who think "Conservatives = racists = inbreds".

    Admittedly, it does sound like Barack, but more of how a younger Barack would speak. In the future, Barry, do remember to self-censor (Use of the F word in polite society is a big major no-no and will only help hinder your mega billion donations to your future institute on global progress, reason, socialism, etc.)

    But in the future, Barry, do remember to tone down the language. Tone it down and you've got the slut-shaming act vs. ordinary Middle Americans down pat.

    , @anon
    This is a common theme I've seen from liberals lately: that if ideological soulmates from around the world could somehow get together, the new liberal world enclave (rid of all the world's conservatives) would be a veritable heaven on earth.

    That there is absolutely no means to implement this fake idea is irrelevant to these supposed serious leftist thinkers. The messy choices of the real world has apparently rendered these hapless ideologues completely impotent.

    On the other hand, Trump's idea seems to be largely doable and could likely lead to noticeable improvements for many or most Americans. While the left blithely continues on with their dreams of utopian otherworlds.

    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    Wow, you must be scared completely out of your wits. The prospect of a rational response to a half-century of stupidity, which will interfere with your ability to abuse those who either created the paradise you live in here, or descended from those who did, must trouble you deeply enough to offer your idiotic post.

    The window for you to exercise your unearned privilege is closing surprisingly quickly. Maybe you should catch a ride with the clock-boy family back to the desert?
    , @AnAnon
    "In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative" - And no one doubts that for a second here. They obviously want to promote and protect their way of life. And in their countries, we have no problems with that.

    "Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well." - Ok, Christians I can understand, but Right-wing Atheists that want to kill gays?

    "All the things they fear Muslims doing – they themselves will do." - Well, probably not the suicide bombings.
    , @Hunsdon
    We kick puppies, too.
    , @Cryptogenic
    X is identical to Y. We are in favor of more of Y and less X. When X tries to prevent more of Y, X is showing it's affinity to Y.

    Do I understand you correctly? Is that even possible?
    , @Paco Wové

    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists.[...]

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They’re the fucking same.
     
    I take it that we can assume that you are pro-democracy, pro-progress, pro-equality, pro-liberal, pro-women, etc.? And, considering that your little vent is in response to a call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, that at the same time you disapprove of restrictions on Muslim immigration into the West?

    So, why exactly are you in favor of a policy that is obviously leading to the dreaded Fear of the Other and consequent rising support for "tough-talking authoritarians and fascists" who are "anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc"?

    It is a perennial puzzle why "pro-democracy, pro-progress, pro-equality, pro-liberal, pro-women, etc." folks like you are so enthusiastic in promoting policies that, by your own description, bring about the conditions that destroy the very things you claim to value.
  4. • Replies: @Dew
    Rand Paul actually admitted having a similar moratorium plan.

    Speaking of Muslims...

    A Muslim who protested Brits over Syrian airstrikes with poster saying 'I am a Muslim... do you trust me enough for a hug?' now faces jail for threatening to bomb MP's house .

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3349803/Muslim-convert-faces-jail-threatening-bomb-MP-s-house.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailUK
  5. Again, if we (meaning particularly those of us on the alt-right) were serious about stopping this Moslem jihad, the method is right there in front of us. Simply endorse, publically and loudly, the “social conservatism” of Islam. The American and European elites, episcopalian and Jewish, media and corporate, would flip inside 24 hours.

    “We have studied the dictates of sharia and find them completely in line with our goals of rolling back the homo agenda, the divorce epidemic, the pornography of Hollywood, acceptance of crime, vulgarity of (c)rap ‘music’ and …”

    Our actual sincerity in the statement is irrelevant. The leftists would have to either argue that Islam supports gay marriage, porn, crime, etc, or they’d have to oppose the Moslems. The reason we keep losing is that we insist on following the rules of a game the leftists created where there are no rules for them. Of course if we continue to sit back and do nothing (or continue being the puppet of Zionists), eventually the Moslems will solve the leftist problem for us.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Houellebecq tried it. I'm not sure if Americans are clever enough to get the joke.
    , @Hail

    Leftists...would have to oppose the Moslems.
     
    They still don't see them as a threat.

    The real enemy, to them, still remains "the Right" (or "the Red Team"). They still, even at this late date, don't get it. History books are full of stories like this, of course. A civilization, faced with a crisis, fails to unite, irrelevant squabbles are carried on, and....
    , @snorlax
    Wouldn't work; Muslims are much higher than gays or women, and possibly even blacks, on the victimhood hierarchy. The Wiki page on Peter Tatchell illustrates it well. For context: Tatchell is a far-leftist/gay activist; Ken Livingstone is a former Mayor of London(!) of an even further left persuasion. It's a rather big chunk I've quoted, but it really must be read to be believed. Livingstone was Mayor at the time. Emphasis mine.

    Yusuf al-Qaradawi

    Livingstone's invitation of Yusuf al-Qaradawi to address a conference on the wearing of the hijab led to a four-year rift between Livingstone and Tatchell, who described Qaradawi as "rightwing, misogynist, anti-semitic and homophobic" and as someone who claimed to have liberal positions in order to deceive Western politicians. Tatchell cites Qaradawi's books and online fatwas where he advocates the execution of apostates (Muslims who turn away from their faith), women who have sex outside marriage and lesbian and gay people. He notes that Qaradawi also supports female genital mutilation and blames rape victims who dress immodestly. Tatchell highlighted the fact that 2,500 Muslims intellectuals signed an open letter in 2004 that condemned Qaradawi as an apologist for terrorism and human rights abuses. Livingstone issued a dossier in defence of Qaradawi as a moderate, and accused Tatchell of writing about the conference without attending it. The dispute became bitter, with Tatchell leading a demonstration against Qaradawi and with Livingstone claiming that Tatchell has "a long history of Islamophobia", and had "constructed a fantasy world in which the main threat we face, worse than the far right, is Islamic fundamentalist hordes... [taking] him into a de facto alliance with the American neo-cons and Israeli intelligence services who want to present themselves as defending western 'civilisation' against more 'backward' civilisations in the Middle East and elsewhere." Tatchell strenuously denied the accusations, pointing out that he has never said any of the things that Livingstone accused him of saying. Imaan, a gay Muslim organisation, initially supported the campaign against Qaradawi, signing a joint letter to the Mayor of London with OutRage! and over a dozen other community groups, including the National Union of Students and Hindu, Sikh and Jewish organisations. The letter condemned Livingstone for hosting the cleric. However, Imaan then reversed its position and withdrew its signature to the letter, along with other organisations. Imaan members were very highly critical of Tatchell's campaign against Qaradawi, some accusing him of Islamophobic conspiracy theories and racism.
     

    , @Reg Cæsar

    Our actual sincerity in the statement is irrelevant. The leftists would have to either argue that Islam supports gay marriage, porn, crime, etc, or they’d have to oppose the Moslems.
     
    Islam could support those things for us, but not for themselves. That's what the Soviets did.
  6. Hearing someone state the obvious is so rare I feel vaguely as though I’m transgressing. Like I’d change the channel quickly if someone caught me enjoying a Trump sermon. The times are changing.

  7. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I posted on the other thread the corollary to Trump’s chess move today: His opponents are all strategic retards.

    If you, dear voter, had any notion of voting for Christie, Rubio etc. you found out today just how dense all of those people are. They all walked into the trap and –politically speaking– dug their own graves.

    If you’re running for Preezy, and you didn’t keep your mouth shut today in response to Trump, then now you get to spend the foreseeable future waiting for the next significant ISIS attack to torpedo your mindless campaign.

    • Agree: Travis, tbraton
  8. I would not be surprised if someone takes a shot at this guy, capiche?

  9. Here is another eyewitness that says it was three white guys who did the shooting. This time from a Mexican guy eyewitness with no Muslim sounding last name.

    Looks like the elites were successful in dumping the Syrian refugees back onto Europe.

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/12/eyewitnesses-describe-terrorist-shooters-white.html

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    These shootings always seem to happen when there's an active shooter drill going on:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-PfHdKRplE
    , @Anonymous
    That makes little logical sense. The 'elites' (i.e. the global organs of the State including the UN, European Commission, and the White House) want to take as many refugees as possible. This will ensure a precedent is set that whenever there is a crisis, the mass migration and free movement of peoples is not only allowed but encouraged.

    There are still unanswered questions behind San Benardino, but one thing is certain: A Muslim couple is dead, taking 14 innocent lives with them. This was not a 'black ops' by the CIA, it was a planned attack from people who despise the West.
  10. It is about time someone had the common sense and courage to make the statement Trump released. We ought to put a complete moratorium on all immigration until we fix the immigration laws and regulations. Say a 25 year moratorium which wouold give us time to vet all those here now, deprt illegal aliens as well as radical jihadists or other similar types.

    It is time to stop digging.

  11. Steve, care to share your opinion on this? Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?

    • Replies: @Hail

    Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that
     
    How?
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?"

    That is how you oppose radical change in the demographics of your country. To oppose such radical change it in the absence of something like Trump is proposing is just empty posturing.

    , @Daniel Williams

    Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?
     
    Are you kidding? I see this as just a beginning.

    Watch an episode of Leave It To Beaver and count the number of Muslims that Wally, Beav, and Whitey (!) interact with. That is the goal.
    , @ben tillman

    Steve, care to share your opinion on this? Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?
     
    Actually, it stops well short of what is necessary.
  12. @Anonymous
    God bless this man. I hope enough people can denounce him in polite circles, but vote for him secretly. Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.

    It’s like Invasion of the Bodysnatchers. I know some fellow Trump supporters but we only speak about it to each other.

  13. Overton Window.

  14. The left was terrified about Trump’s idea of a possible database of Muslims. His solution: don’t let them in in the first place. Problem solved left-wingers! Why aren’t you applauding?

    • Replies: @GW
    The Left either argues America is inherently racist and a dangerous place for Muslims because of people like Trump or it's demanding we take in more non-white Muslims.

    The Left also places the blame for black urban poverty on both white flight and gentrification. It's just what they do.
  15. This is amazing. Is Trump too good to be true? Is this really happening?

  16. Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)"

    Why? Why is the default assumption that we have to admit somebody? We don't have to admit any of them. So let's not.
    , @Bragadocious
    Yes we need more Albanians. My new MasterCard hasn't been pirated -- yet. These hard-working dreamers can get on that pronto.
    , @Ttjy

    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)
     
    Why? I'd shut off all immigration for decades like Jim Sweeney above said
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Why? Does a nation with our high unemployment rate need immigrants? Let's just have a blanket moratorium if singling out Muslims gets the establishment's panties in a twist.
    , @ben tillman

    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)
     
    Why? What's in it for us?
    , @anon
    Albanians run the slave trade in the EU.
  17. The tide is turning. My business partner is a typical left leaning product of postgraduate studies: NPR, Daily Show, etc. Even he remarked to the effect of “I don’t understand why everyone is apologizing for Muslim immigration.” Going further, he said that typically he viewed the left/liberal viewpoint to be the “moderate” one but between the Muslim apologetics and the ructions on campus that now they are the crazies, and that it was scary to him that the fundamentalist Christians are the only ones that are talking sensibly about Islam in America… I broached some iStevie concepts such as the idea that two generations of PC has left the goodthinkers without the language to talk about the that and he was totally receptive…

  18. Best thing since Buchanan. Better, because the time is ripe. Amplification and graphic here:

    http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2015/12/bailey-on-trump-muslims-and-clash-of.html

  19. @Stan D Mute
    Again, if we (meaning particularly those of us on the alt-right) were serious about stopping this Moslem jihad, the method is right there in front of us. Simply endorse, publically and loudly, the "social conservatism" of Islam. The American and European elites, episcopalian and Jewish, media and corporate, would flip inside 24 hours.

    "We have studied the dictates of sharia and find them completely in line with our goals of rolling back the homo agenda, the divorce epidemic, the pornography of Hollywood, acceptance of crime, vulgarity of (c)rap 'music' and ..."

    Our actual sincerity in the statement is irrelevant. The leftists would have to either argue that Islam supports gay marriage, porn, crime, etc, or they'd have to oppose the Moslems. The reason we keep losing is that we insist on following the rules of a game the leftists created where there are no rules for them. Of course if we continue to sit back and do nothing (or continue being the puppet of Zionists), eventually the Moslems will solve the leftist problem for us.

    Houellebecq tried it. I’m not sure if Americans are clever enough to get the joke.

    • Replies: @Stan D Mute
    Houellebecq, as I understand it from reviews, presented a guy who went along to get ahead.

    And the other comments in reply missed it entirely. The leftists are simple children. This is why they want Government (daddy) to take care of them. They want Government to protect them from the meanies who would hurt their feelings and want Government (still daddy) to accept them despite their repugnant flaws. Government is Good Daddy or Fantasy Daddy. The political right, especially the "far right" is their Real Daddy. It's the daddy who punished them when he caught them molesting their sister or fellating the nine year old next door when they were twelve. It's the daddy who cut their credit card in half after he saw the statement for $1800 spent at American Eagle Outfitters buying new outfits for the boyfriend. The right is the daddy who spanked them, grounded them, etc. The leftist wants to punish that mean bad daddy and have good Government daddy shower them with praise and goodies.

    By appearing to embrace the conservatism of the Moslem, the leftist will be forced to confront a sliver of reality. No matter what, he cannot agree with bad daddy and he championed Moslems only because he thought bad daddy hated them. Now bad daddy is praising the Moslems' social (and fiscal?) conservatism? Why then of course Moslems are evil! Bad daddy would want to make his slutty daughter get circumcised! Bad daddy would want to chop off the hands of thieves - remember how angry he was when you got caught shoplifting? Bad daddy would want you to wear a hijab - he was adamant that you couldn't wear lacy lingerie to school..

    Leftists really can't think more deeply than this. If they could, they'd understand that the Moslems would have them all publically tortured and killed. If the leftist could think logically based on evidence and reason, they'd be conservative. This is why we always fail in attempts to persuade them with logic. Their entire ideology is based on goodies and resentment.

    Also, for what it's worth, this same reverse psychology would work on their reproductive choices. They refuse to settle down and have children (leading in most cases to becoming responsible) because that's what bad daddy wants. But if bad daddy were to say, "Thank God you don't have kids, you're utterly incapable of having kids, probably infertile and kids would run into traffic to get away from you anyway." - Well then! I'll show you bad daddy!
  20. @Anonymous
    God bless this man. I hope enough people can denounce him in polite circles, but vote for him secretly. Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.

    Michael Barone had a column this week berating Trump. In it he comments:

    Trump has consistently run better in polls conducted by automated phone calls and over the Internet (29 percent) than in live-interview polls (23 percent).

    It would seem that one fifth of Trump supporters feel social pressure to keep their mouths shut when they have to confess their support to a real human, even if just over the phone. The effect may be even stronger than that, as some may not admit to being pro-Trump even in more-anonymous-seeming polls.

    (Barone’s alternative theory: Non-live-interview polls are rigged by Trumpbots.)

    • Replies: @Gp
    Easily solved. No more secret ballot. Every voter must declere before angry black census lady.
  21. @Stan D Mute
    Again, if we (meaning particularly those of us on the alt-right) were serious about stopping this Moslem jihad, the method is right there in front of us. Simply endorse, publically and loudly, the "social conservatism" of Islam. The American and European elites, episcopalian and Jewish, media and corporate, would flip inside 24 hours.

    "We have studied the dictates of sharia and find them completely in line with our goals of rolling back the homo agenda, the divorce epidemic, the pornography of Hollywood, acceptance of crime, vulgarity of (c)rap 'music' and ..."

    Our actual sincerity in the statement is irrelevant. The leftists would have to either argue that Islam supports gay marriage, porn, crime, etc, or they'd have to oppose the Moslems. The reason we keep losing is that we insist on following the rules of a game the leftists created where there are no rules for them. Of course if we continue to sit back and do nothing (or continue being the puppet of Zionists), eventually the Moslems will solve the leftist problem for us.

    Leftists…would have to oppose the Moslems.

    They still don’t see them as a threat.

    The real enemy, to them, still remains “the Right” (or “the Red Team”). They still, even at this late date, don’t get it. History books are full of stories like this, of course. A civilization, faced with a crisis, fails to unite, irrelevant squabbles are carried on, and….

  22. It’s a-happenin’…Trump is gonna bring this country back to Sanity.. amazing a batshit crazy new yorker had to do it, but maybe that makes it even better…

    Careful he’s not too successful, Steve. He could put you outta business if your ideas/worldview become too mainstream….

    Keep at it Steve-o you’re doing God’s work…

    • Replies: @JSM
    Are you kidding? If Trump is even moderately successful, we Middle Class White Americans will erect a statue to Steve, and put him to work as a hero and National Treasure, never to want for anything.

    Right now Steve is poor and has to beg for donations. But within three years of a Trump Presidency having well and truly broken the dam of Political Correctness, Steve will be a Rock Star, with bigger draw numbers than the Pope.
  23. @Vinay
    Steve, care to share your opinion on this? Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?

    Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that

    How?

    • Replies: @Vinay
    For one thing, he's not just talking about Muslim immigration, he's talking about *all* Muslim visits. That is so totally crazy it wouldn't even move the Overton window. Rather, it'll probably repel the Overton window in the *other* direction -- like Dylan Roof, who managed to achieve the previously unthinkable, getting South Carolina to abandon the Confederate flag and causing a bunch of other places to ban it.

    Bush managed to set the Sunni Arab world on fire in retaliation for 9/11 while strongly and repeatedly emphasizing religious inclusiveness. Roosevelt deployed a German American to pulverize Germany to rubble. Compare and contrast!
  24. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    ” Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well.”

    Really? Where are they.

    And if you think that Trump is a fascist, they you don’t know what fascism is.

    You are an idiot.

  25. this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    Trump is right and here's why:

    http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/06/24/shock-poll-51-of-american-muslims-want-sharia-25-okay-with-violence-against-americans/

    This is a hostile army in our midst, not immigrants, not refugees.

    Doesn't matter if they have high IQ's or not. Many Muslim terrorists have college degrees, some were engineers and even doctors. Once they become devout - they become killers or supporters of them.

    Thanks but no thanks.
    , @Max

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.
     
    >high IQ Muslims

    top kek m8
    , @Prof. Woland
    A better question is why should we be penalized? Muslim immigration should be halted until we figure out what is going on AND why it is in our interest (haven't heard a good reason yet).
    , @Travis
    High IQ Muslims are actually more dangerous than the retarded muslims. The problem with muslims is their ideology combined with their clannish behavior. The more intelligent muslims pose a much higher risk to Americans, as they have the ability to wage more efficient jihad and cause more death and destruction than the typical low IQ muslims.
    , @iSteveFan

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.
     
    Because high IQ muslims should stay behind to bring their countries into the 21st century. How are they ever going to advance if the colonial powers keep extracting their top human resources?
    , @Lot

    why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.
     
    That'd be a good point if we gave immigrants IQ tests. Until then, it isn't.
    , @anon
    Because we don't need them either.

    Did you think that, just because this blog talks about IQ a lot, we would find that convincing?
    , @JSM
    So, you think Nidal Hasan, a U.S. Army major and psychiatrist<, a Muslim who shouted Allahu Akbar fatally shot 13 people and injured more than 30 others on a US Army base, was dumb?
    , @Chris Mallory
    Most of the Muslim terrorists in the West seem to have been engineers or had other professional training. Maybe some of the Paris attackers were low IQ drones.
    , @Cryptogenic
    They should pose this question to their below average/low IQ coreligionists, i.e., the majority of them.
    , @ben tillman

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.
     
    You have a strange view of what constitutes being "penalized" Am *I* penalized every time you deposit a check in your own account rather than mine? Exercising one's property rights does not penalize others.
    , @Massimo Heitor

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.
     
    Nice & pleasant is more important than IQ. Everyone here would rather live around dumb pleasant people than intelligent vicious people. Vicious low IQ people are bad too.

    To rephrase: Why should nice, pleasant, Muslims be penalized?

    They shouldn't. Everyone here would rather live among more Ayaan Hirsi Alis and Razib Khans and less Bernie Sanders and Bill DeBlasios.

    Screening between good and bad people is complicated. Something as simple as screening by religion is quite coarse and it will make many mistakes.

    It's baffling to me to hear citizens of Saudi Arabia criticize Trump as some great evil. They ruthlessly forbid other religions from their country and block members of their very own Arab Sunni Muslim demographic from immigrating. Those are orders of magnitude worse than anything Trump has proposed.
  26. @Vinay
    Steve, care to share your opinion on this? Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?

    “Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?”

    That is how you oppose radical change in the demographics of your country. To oppose such radical change it in the absence of something like Trump is proposing is just empty posturing.

  27. “It would certainly be challenged as unconstitutional,” he said. “And I predict the Supreme Court would strike it down.”

    Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration. It’s the only way to be fair and protect us from terrorists. Thanks Supreme Court!

    • Replies: @Ttjy

    “It would certainly be challenged as unconstitutional,” he said. “And I predict the Supreme Court would strike it down.”
     
    So now we can't even discriminate against people who live thousands of miles away who aren't citizens and have no right to be here? This country is so screwed up. The Constitution is really getting to be the enemy of white people if that is true. Either we let in everybody or nobody.I'd take nobody.
    , @Stephen R. Diamond

    we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration
     
    That is the only effective demand.
    , @tbraton

    “It would certainly be challenged as unconstitutional,” he said. “And I predict the Supreme Court would strike it down.”
     
    I tried scrolling back to locate the poster who said that in order to determine what "it" was referring to. I was unable to locate the quote so I am left in dark what he was referring to. However, the legal issue would not arise until and unless Trump became President. (I can't believe the Supreme Court would rule that prohibition of Muslim immigrants would somehow violate the Constitution since there is nothing in the Constitution that would bar such exclusion, if enacted by Congress. If the SC were to strike down an executive order by Trump, that would call into question a whole long list of similar actions by Obama. However, the issue is moot until Trump becomes President and issues such an order.) In the meantime, he seems to be in sole possession of a very potent political issue. An earlier poster alluded to the likely possibility that there might be another terrorist attack instigated by Muslims in the near future. Like that earlier poster, I am of the opinion that, if such a tragedy were to occur, it might be time to imitate the late Don Meredith on ABC's original Monday Night Football and start singing "The Party's Over." And I'm talking not only about the Republican nomination but the final showdown with Ms. Hillary herself. (Being a lifelong Redskins fan, I hate to say it about a former Dallas Cowboy, but Don Meredith was a truly funny and entertaining guy, a real American character.)
  28. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing.

    Except in Spain in 2004.

    (1) 2002-’03: Spain’s center-right, pro-Bush government participates in Iraq Attaq.
    (2) March 11, 2004: Muslims bomb a train in Spain. 2,200 casualties, 191 fatal.
    (3) March 14, 2004: Spain has an election. Despite pre-bombing polls showing the conservatives with at least a ten-point lead, the Socialists have a shock great result, win 47% of seats outright (to the conservatives 42% of seats), and are able to lead the new government.
    (4) Circa March 15, 2004: Socialists announce Spain’s immediate pull out of Iraq.

    Terrorism worked.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Now finish the sentence.

    How'd it go in France so far?

    January 2015: Charlie Hebdo in Paris
    November 2015: Paris massacre

    December 2015: National Front wins first round and is projected to take round two later in week.
    And are now a strong contender for winning Presidency of France in '17.

    Uh, yes, terrorism worked, just that it had the opposite effect from what occurred in Spain.
    , @Vinay
    "Spain has an election. Despite pre-bombing polls showing the conservatives with at least a ten-point lead, the Socialists have a shock great result"

    That's because the idiot conservatives insisted on NOT recognizing it as Islamic terrorism and choosing to blame ETA. The government sent memos to its diplomats insisting the attack be blamed on ETA! It was "BENGHAZI!!!" but for real. No big surprise that the people didn't trust the party which didn't even recognize Islamic terrorism to save them from it.
  29. @Andy
    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    “Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)”

    Why? Why is the default assumption that we have to admit somebody? We don’t have to admit any of them. So let’s not.

    • Replies: @andy
    Admit as visitors, not as migrants
  30. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    Go away..cuck…your days of running this once great country into the ground are over…I hear Germany is upholding your ideals..Consider moving there..Ciao

  31. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    Somewhere in the bowel movement that is the American media/academia complex, lots of people are laughing at how they’ve sold this “symbiotic relationship” you’ve imagined: a spectacle of false extremes that makes completely reasonable people have to choose between saying nothing or being branded a crypto-fascist, Islamophobe, Islamofascist, or whatever fascist flavor of the week they’re pushing. There really is no middle ground allowed anymore, because the adults have left the room.

    It doesn’t have to be this way. A simple return to pre 1964 Immigration Act, with the sensible vetting that any sane society does, would work just fine.

    You’re either a troll or someone who’s bought into this childish dichotomy of reasoned, open-minded, tolerant wise ones vs murderous knuckle draggers. Either way, grow up.

  32. Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I’m not even saying that “Islamism” and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship…. I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    Sure, that’s why it’s the leftists who have made it their First Commandment that the borders shall remain open, and America shall remain open to Muslims. That’s why Muslims vote Democrat. That’s why Muslims in the West couch everything they say in Leftist rhetoric. It’s why the Right is the only place you’ll find people saying we shouldn’t allow immigration from terrorist-heavy countries, expressing skepticism about Islamic cultures. Etc.

    The relationship between Islam and white Conservatives is analogous to that between National Socialists and Communists.

    But, let’s pretend what you say is true; then why is the Left on Team Muslim? Are they just idiots?

  33. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    Barack, is that you? Or Loretta Lynch? Nah, not Lynch. Maybe Eric Holder is making a warm up for his $50k per speech in the upcoming years, with just a little red meat for all the leftist loonies out there. You know the kind. The ones who think “Conservatives = racists = inbreds”.

    Admittedly, it does sound like Barack, but more of how a younger Barack would speak. In the future, Barry, do remember to self-censor (Use of the F word in polite society is a big major no-no and will only help hinder your mega billion donations to your future institute on global progress, reason, socialism, etc.)

    But in the future, Barry, do remember to tone down the language. Tone it down and you’ve got the slut-shaming act vs. ordinary Middle Americans down pat.

  34. @Anonymous
    God bless this man. I hope enough people can denounce him in polite circles, but vote for him secretly. Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.

    Fortunately, the list of things that can cause “social death” in elite circles is getting so long it is inevitably only a matter of time before that elite finds themselves surrounded by enemies of their own creation who will show them no mercy.
    After all, they’re already starting to eat their own.

  35. @Hail

    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing.
     
    Except in Spain in 2004.

    (1) 2002-'03: Spain's center-right, pro-Bush government participates in Iraq Attaq.
    (2) March 11, 2004: Muslims bomb a train in Spain. 2,200 casualties, 191 fatal.
    (3) March 14, 2004: Spain has an election. Despite pre-bombing polls showing the conservatives with at least a ten-point lead, the Socialists have a shock great result, win 47% of seats outright (to the conservatives 42% of seats), and are able to lead the new government.
    (4) Circa March 15, 2004: Socialists announce Spain's immediate pull out of Iraq.

    Terrorism worked.

    Now finish the sentence.

    How’d it go in France so far?

    January 2015: Charlie Hebdo in Paris
    November 2015: Paris massacre

    December 2015: National Front wins first round and is projected to take round two later in week.
    And are now a strong contender for winning Presidency of France in ’17.

    Uh, yes, terrorism worked, just that it had the opposite effect from what occurred in Spain.

  36. @Hail

    Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that
     
    How?

    For one thing, he’s not just talking about Muslim immigration, he’s talking about *all* Muslim visits. That is so totally crazy it wouldn’t even move the Overton window. Rather, it’ll probably repel the Overton window in the *other* direction — like Dylan Roof, who managed to achieve the previously unthinkable, getting South Carolina to abandon the Confederate flag and causing a bunch of other places to ban it.

    Bush managed to set the Sunni Arab world on fire in retaliation for 9/11 while strongly and repeatedly emphasizing religious inclusiveness. Roosevelt deployed a German American to pulverize Germany to rubble. Compare and contrast!

    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    For one thing, he’s not just talking about Muslim immigration, he’s talking about *all* Muslim visits. That is so totally crazy i
     
    Had that policy been in place in 2001, the 9-11 aviation students would never have been here.
    , @notsaying
    Vinay,

    You are right, this is over the top. I personally do not support why Trump says on this. That he thinks we could prevent American citizen Muslims overseas from returning for awhile shows just how much he is not a man of details.

    Still, at this point I still think Trump's presence in the 2016 presidential field has had value. It should have shown both the elite and the rest of us just how fed up and dying for change a lot of us are. It has shown how the status quo isn't working for most of us and that we want something else.

    I personally don't want Donald Trump to be president -- not at all.

    But if he ends us pushing Americans to open up their eyes and realize that they should be mad as hell and not take things anymore, he'll have done us a great favor.

    Time will tell if Trump's big mouth takes him out of this race well before the end of the Republican primary season next year.
  37. @Vinay
    Steve, care to share your opinion on this? Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?

    Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?

    Are you kidding? I see this as just a beginning.

    Watch an episode of Leave It To Beaver and count the number of Muslims that Wally, Beav, and Whitey (!) interact with. That is the goal.

    • Replies: @Richard

    Watch an episode of Leave It To Beaver and count the number of Muslims that Wally, Beav, and Whitey (!) interact with. That is the goal.
     
    There actually is an episode of "The Andy Griffith Show" where Islam makes a brief appearance. "Alcohol and Old Lace"; guess what it's a parody of. Two nice old white ladies make moonshine out of a still, and because they have compunctions about debauching the town, they sell it only to people who claim they're using it for a holiday. Naturally, this inspires a new wave of multiculturalism as bums, tramps and drunkards scratch out semi-plausible excuses as to why they need some moonshine to bring savor to a special occasion. The most audacious guy claims to be a Muslim celebrating the birth of Muhammad.

    Being nice white ladies, they're impeccably genial as they usher him off with his moonshine, even returning his Arabian hand gesture and wishing him a "Happy Mohammad's birthday". The following dialogue ensues:

    1st White Lady: "I had no idea there were so many Moslems in Mayberry."
    2nd White Lady: "I could have sworn Lawrence Hansen was a Lutheran. Shows that if it wasn't for their holidays, you'd never know!"
  38. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    This is a common theme I’ve seen from liberals lately: that if ideological soulmates from around the world could somehow get together, the new liberal world enclave (rid of all the world’s conservatives) would be a veritable heaven on earth.

    That there is absolutely no means to implement this fake idea is irrelevant to these supposed serious leftist thinkers. The messy choices of the real world has apparently rendered these hapless ideologues completely impotent.

    On the other hand, Trump’s idea seems to be largely doable and could likely lead to noticeable improvements for many or most Americans. While the left blithely continues on with their dreams of utopian otherworlds.

  39. @Andy
    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    Yes we need more Albanians. My new MasterCard hasn’t been pirated — yet. These hard-working dreamers can get on that pronto.

  40. @Andy
    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    Why? I’d shut off all immigration for decades like Jim Sweeney above said

  41. Why is the media ignoring Rand Paul’s call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, which preceded Trump’s by at least six hours?

    Poor Rand. Can never get any attention.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It's because he's a manlet. Manlets get no respect.
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe
    "Why is the media ignoring Rand Paul’s call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, which preceded Trump’s by at least six hours?"

    Because Donald Trump is going to be the next President of the United States, and Rand Paul isn't.
  42. @Anonymous
    Here is another eyewitness that says it was three white guys who did the shooting. This time from a Mexican guy eyewitness with no Muslim sounding last name.

    Looks like the elites were successful in dumping the Syrian refugees back onto Europe.

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/12/eyewitnesses-describe-terrorist-shooters-white.html

    These shootings always seem to happen when there’s an active shooter drill going on:

  43. @Andy
    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    Why? Does a nation with our high unemployment rate need immigrants? Let’s just have a blanket moratorium if singling out Muslims gets the establishment’s panties in a twist.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    Works for me and probably most Americans.
  44. If I were Trump, I would walk this back to “what I mean is, we shouldn’t be importing people from terrorist-heavy cultures. We can still have Muslims from Brunei.” And add that if the SC strikes down such a law because discrimination, he’d have no choice but to shut down all immigration, in a totally non-discriminatory way.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Rule one, Never back down,'
    Double down.

    It's how the left won.
  45. @Hail

    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing.
     
    Except in Spain in 2004.

    (1) 2002-'03: Spain's center-right, pro-Bush government participates in Iraq Attaq.
    (2) March 11, 2004: Muslims bomb a train in Spain. 2,200 casualties, 191 fatal.
    (3) March 14, 2004: Spain has an election. Despite pre-bombing polls showing the conservatives with at least a ten-point lead, the Socialists have a shock great result, win 47% of seats outright (to the conservatives 42% of seats), and are able to lead the new government.
    (4) Circa March 15, 2004: Socialists announce Spain's immediate pull out of Iraq.

    Terrorism worked.

    “Spain has an election. Despite pre-bombing polls showing the conservatives with at least a ten-point lead, the Socialists have a shock great result”

    That’s because the idiot conservatives insisted on NOT recognizing it as Islamic terrorism and choosing to blame ETA. The government sent memos to its diplomats insisting the attack be blamed on ETA! It was “BENGHAZI!!!” but for real. No big surprise that the people didn’t trust the party which didn’t even recognize Islamic terrorism to save them from it.

  46. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    Trump is right and here’s why:

    http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/06/24/shock-poll-51-of-american-muslims-want-sharia-25-okay-with-violence-against-americans/

    This is a hostile army in our midst, not immigrants, not refugees.

    Doesn’t matter if they have high IQ’s or not. Many Muslim terrorists have college degrees, some were engineers and even doctors. Once they become devout – they become killers or supporters of them.

    Thanks but no thanks.

  47. @Harry Baldwin
    Why? Does a nation with our high unemployment rate need immigrants? Let's just have a blanket moratorium if singling out Muslims gets the establishment's panties in a twist.

    Works for me and probably most Americans.

  48. @Stan D Mute
    Again, if we (meaning particularly those of us on the alt-right) were serious about stopping this Moslem jihad, the method is right there in front of us. Simply endorse, publically and loudly, the "social conservatism" of Islam. The American and European elites, episcopalian and Jewish, media and corporate, would flip inside 24 hours.

    "We have studied the dictates of sharia and find them completely in line with our goals of rolling back the homo agenda, the divorce epidemic, the pornography of Hollywood, acceptance of crime, vulgarity of (c)rap 'music' and ..."

    Our actual sincerity in the statement is irrelevant. The leftists would have to either argue that Islam supports gay marriage, porn, crime, etc, or they'd have to oppose the Moslems. The reason we keep losing is that we insist on following the rules of a game the leftists created where there are no rules for them. Of course if we continue to sit back and do nothing (or continue being the puppet of Zionists), eventually the Moslems will solve the leftist problem for us.

    Wouldn’t work; Muslims are much higher than gays or women, and possibly even blacks, on the victimhood hierarchy. The Wiki page on Peter Tatchell illustrates it well. For context: Tatchell is a far-leftist/gay activist; Ken Livingstone is a former Mayor of London(!) of an even further left persuasion. It’s a rather big chunk I’ve quoted, but it really must be read to be believed. Livingstone was Mayor at the time. Emphasis mine.

    Yusuf al-Qaradawi

    Livingstone’s invitation of Yusuf al-Qaradawi to address a conference on the wearing of the hijab led to a four-year rift between Livingstone and Tatchell, who described Qaradawi as “rightwing, misogynist, anti-semitic and homophobic” and as someone who claimed to have liberal positions in order to deceive Western politicians. Tatchell cites Qaradawi’s books and online fatwas where he advocates the execution of apostates (Muslims who turn away from their faith), women who have sex outside marriage and lesbian and gay people. He notes that Qaradawi also supports female genital mutilation and blames rape victims who dress immodestly. Tatchell highlighted the fact that 2,500 Muslims intellectuals signed an open letter in 2004 that condemned Qaradawi as an apologist for terrorism and human rights abuses. Livingstone issued a dossier in defence of Qaradawi as a moderate, and accused Tatchell of writing about the conference without attending it. The dispute became bitter, with Tatchell leading a demonstration against Qaradawi and with Livingstone claiming that Tatchell has “a long history of Islamophobia”, and had “constructed a fantasy world in which the main threat we face, worse than the far right, is Islamic fundamentalist hordes… [taking] him into a de facto alliance with the American neo-cons and Israeli intelligence services who want to present themselves as defending western ‘civilisation’ against more ‘backward’ civilisations in the Middle East and elsewhere.” Tatchell strenuously denied the accusations, pointing out that he has never said any of the things that Livingstone accused him of saying. Imaan, a gay Muslim organisation, initially supported the campaign against Qaradawi, signing a joint letter to the Mayor of London with OutRage! and over a dozen other community groups, including the National Union of Students and Hindu, Sikh and Jewish organisations. The letter condemned Livingstone for hosting the cleric. However, Imaan then reversed its position and withdrew its signature to the letter, along with other organisations. Imaan members were very highly critical of Tatchell’s campaign against Qaradawi, some accusing him of Islamophobic conspiracy theories and racism.

  49. Great Trump is for limiting muslim immigrants, and decreasing immigration. Except for when he is not for increasing H1-b visa’s
    http://fusion.net/story/223664/donald-trump-mark-zuckerberg-h1b-visa-gop-debate/
    because we need to lower wages
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-wages-too-high

    On the other hand, Trump is calling for making muslims to where badges, hinting at the need for a police state, and calling defenders of freedom of speech foolish(how would that go for this side if a leftist was this authoritarian?)

    Muslim immigration is bad, muslim terrorism is bad, but muslim terrorism is relatively small threat. Perhaps having a megalomonical dishonest president who thinks tearing up the constitution is good thing, would be worse.

    The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism, Trump is exactly what every one who wants freedom in this country should fear.

    I know Trump says things that nobody else is willing to say that are true unfortunately he is only saying them because identifying a alienated and large constituency was his only path to the nomination.

    He has always been a plutocrat playing a farcical caricture of anti-plutocratic crusader, if you take him seriously as national conservative your deluding yourself. This guy was criticizing Mitt Romney 3 years ago for being too hard on immigration and losing the hispanic vote.
    http://www.redstate.com/diary/southernconstitutionalist/2015/07/19/trump-supported-path-to-citizenship-said-romney-was-mean-spirited-on-immigration/

    I hope he collapses and Ted Cruz takes his segment because while I don’t trust Ted as far as I can throw him either, I think he is slightly less likely to declare a police state and nuke russia.

    Cruz can see the advance of the populist voter vein Trump has uncovered and he is not a total loose cannon.

    • Replies: @anon
    The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism, Trump is exactly what every one who wants freedom in this country should fear.

    Then why are you complaining about Trump's plan to reduce Islamic terrorism?
    , @Bill B.
    "The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism..."

    No. Islam really is a threat. The choice presented by the Ummah is a moribund, morose Islamic society circling the drain of ambition in this life or the vicious theocratic full monty.

    Any deviation is, history shows, invariably short-lived absent overpowering externalities.

    To confuse the threat to the reaction is a classic mistake, albeit one partly enabled by the inadequacy of the current terms of political debate.

    Things will become much clearer over the next few years. Muslims are certainly helping to smash contemporary political shibboleths by hardly bothering to disguise their aims.
    , @NC
    "I hope he collapses and Ted Cruz takes his segment because while I don’t trust Ted as far as I can throw him either, I think he is slightly less likely to declare a police state and nuke russia. "

    Didn't you watch the last debates? Trump is the only legitimate contender that I trust not to start WW3. Every other Democratic and Republican candidate (except Paul) is openly advancing an insanely belligerent policy of confrontation towards Russia. Conventional wisdom appears to be that NOT goading a nuclear superpower that we have no natural conflicts with is somehow weird and dangerous. But letting in millions of Muslims? Well shucks, that's as American as mom and apple pie.
  50. Mr. Anon—Wow. It’s like this Trump guy thinks that politicians should actually carry out the wishes of their constituents.

    SOME of their constituents, mind you.

    Jim Sweeney—Say a 25 year moratorium which wouold give us time to vet all those here now, deprt illegal aliens as well as radical jihadists or other similar types.

    How are YOU able to tell who are the “radical jihadists”? Do you use a magic eight ball?

    Hail—A civilization, faced with a crisis…

    Yes, a crisis involving those Muslims who are actively involved in the destruction of America. That does NOT mean every single man, woman, and child who practices Islam in the United States.

    Svigor—Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration.

    That’s anti-white.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    "How are YOU able to tell who are the “radical jihadists”? Do you use a magic eight ball?"

    No magic necessary. Start by visiting the top 50 mosques in US. Have undercover agents fluent in Arabic/English etc and secretly record various sermons each week. They were radicalized somewhere, and the mosque is usually the center of Islamic daily life. Also, some of the radicals are no strangers to social media (twitter; facebook; etc).


    "Yes, a crisis involving those Muslims who are actively involved in the destruction of America. That does NOT mean every single man, woman, and child who practices Islam in the United States."

    Uh yep, everyone's crying a river with ya. Boo-hoo, boo-hoo. US will be missing out on accepting thousands of Mohammeds. Shame. Pity. All that lovely vibrant diversity gone out the window. Shame. Tis. A. Shame.

    , @Mr. Anon
    "How are YOU able to tell who are the “radical jihadists”? Do you use a magic eight ball?

    Keep out all muslims. Then we don't have to figure out which is which.

    We don't have to allow them to come here - any of them. It is not their right. Permission to emigrate to America is entirely within our gift.
  51. Cost to keep Muslims out of the country: $0
    Cost to fight 2 more wars after Muslims in the US commit terrorist atrocities: $1 trillion

    But remember, it’s Donald Trump who is the extremist.

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Trump has been calling for boots on the ground in the Mideast. I suppose that's still better though considering his immigration position.
    , @Steve Sailer
    Mainstream orthodoxy: Invade the World / Invite the World

    Bizarre extremism: Burkean prudence
    , @Lot
    One trillion for the Iraq War? I wish! That's just the DOD direct spending, no interest included.

    From wikipedia:

    According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report published in October 2007, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost taxpayers a total of $2.4 trillion by 2017 when counting the huge interest costs because combat is being financed with borrowed money. The CBO estimated that of the $2.4 trillion long-term price tag for the war, about $1.9 trillion of that would be spent on Iraq, or $6,300 per U.S. citizen.
     
    "$6300 per citizen," given that, as Mitt Romney notes, less than half of us are net tax payers, actually means $12,600 per taxpayer. A married taxpaying couple: $25,200.

    This $2.4 trillion estimate came from the CBO, which of course would be biased toward a lower number.


    Joseph Stiglitz, former chief economist of the World Bank and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, and Linda Bilmes of Harvard University, have stated the total costs of the Iraq War on the US economy will be three trillion dollars in a moderate scenario
     
    And of course these are only the "politically correct" costs, and the estimate was from 2008. I highly doubt they included any of the "invite the world" results of the wars.

    Also, these are just to the USA. Bush also spent down a fair amount of our good will with the UK to drag them into the war, and they had hundreds of KIAs too.
  52. @Svigor

    “It would certainly be challenged as unconstitutional,” he said. “And I predict the Supreme Court would strike it down.”
     
    Then, regrettably, we'll have to place a moratorium on all immigration. It's the only way to be fair and protect us from terrorists. Thanks Supreme Court!

    “It would certainly be challenged as unconstitutional,” he said. “And I predict the Supreme Court would strike it down.”

    So now we can’t even discriminate against people who live thousands of miles away who aren’t citizens and have no right to be here? This country is so screwed up. The Constitution is really getting to be the enemy of white people if that is true. Either we let in everybody or nobody.I’d take nobody.

  53. @Svigor

    “It would certainly be challenged as unconstitutional,” he said. “And I predict the Supreme Court would strike it down.”
     
    Then, regrettably, we'll have to place a moratorium on all immigration. It's the only way to be fair and protect us from terrorists. Thanks Supreme Court!

    we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration

    That is the only effective demand.

    • Replies: @epebble
    How would one implement it? If you have a visa application where there is a field for religion, someone who wants to come will write christian. Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less! The best he can do is stop entry to those from specific countries. But that will be diplomatic nightmare. Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate. That will totally mess up our "foreign policy" types.
  54. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    >high IQ Muslims

    top kek m8

    • Replies: @snorlax
    Steve Jobs' dad, Mohawk Guy at NASA, etc. etc.
  55. I wonder if Loretta Lynch is planning Trump for this using those new hate speech laws she mentioned the other day.

  56. Democrats want mass Islamic immigration for the votes, but what the hell do RINO elites want mass Islamic immigration for? It sure as hell is not for cheap labor because Muslims are not picking fruits and vegetables in rural Central California or rural Nebraska for example. Muslim women are not becoming the nannies of rich WASP, Irish & Italian Catholic, and Jewish infidel babies. At least with Hispanics it makes more sense for why RINOs want as many of them here as possible.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    Democrats want mass Islamic immigration for the votes, but what the hell do RINO elites want mass Islamic immigration for?
     
    I can think of a few reasons why Republicans support muslim immigration. First, the US is seen worldwide as being extremely one-sided in our dealings with Israel and the palis. So being able to throw bones to any muslim group serves to show that we have nothing against them. In fact I thought bombing Serbia and supporting the Kosovar muslims was definitely related to this. More than likely allowing muslim immigration into the US is too.

    Second the GOP, sans the paleocons, has been on the frontline of this whole democracy-spreading business. How can you go into a place like Iraq or Afghanistan and preach the universal values of democracy, tolerance, blah, blah, blah and then tell the locals, "you can't come to the USA"? You can't. If you did you'd offend them and wreck your little project.

    Third, the GOP elite are products of the same Ivies as the lefties and they have been marinated in the post 60's culture. Thus their beliefs on certain issues like immigration are similar to the left's in that they cannot countenance discriminating against any non-white group.
  57. @Hail
    Why is the media ignoring Rand Paul's call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, which preceded Trump's by at least six hours?

    Poor Rand. Can never get any attention.

    It’s because he’s a manlet. Manlets get no respect.

  58. @Wilkey
    Cost to keep Muslims out of the country: $0
    Cost to fight 2 more wars after Muslims in the US commit terrorist atrocities: $1 trillion

    But remember, it's Donald Trump who is the extremist.

    Trump has been calling for boots on the ground in the Mideast. I suppose that’s still better though considering his immigration position.

  59. @Bragadocious
    The left was terrified about Trump's idea of a possible database of Muslims. His solution: don't let them in in the first place. Problem solved left-wingers! Why aren't you applauding?

    The Left either argues America is inherently racist and a dangerous place for Muslims because of people like Trump or it’s demanding we take in more non-white Muslims.

    The Left also places the blame for black urban poverty on both white flight and gentrification. It’s just what they do.

  60. Tonight may have sealed the election for Trump.

  61. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    A better question is why should we be penalized? Muslim immigration should be halted until we figure out what is going on AND why it is in our interest (haven’t heard a good reason yet).

  62. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    High IQ Muslims are actually more dangerous than the retarded muslims. The problem with muslims is their ideology combined with their clannish behavior. The more intelligent muslims pose a much higher risk to Americans, as they have the ability to wage more efficient jihad and cause more death and destruction than the typical low IQ muslims.

  63. @Max

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.
     
    >high IQ Muslims

    top kek m8

    Steve Jobs’ dad, Mohawk Guy at NASA, etc. etc.

  64. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    Because high IQ muslims should stay behind to bring their countries into the 21st century. How are they ever going to advance if the colonial powers keep extracting their top human resources?

  65. @Stephen R. Diamond

    we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration
     
    That is the only effective demand.

    How would one implement it? If you have a visa application where there is a field for religion, someone who wants to come will write christian. Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less! The best he can do is stop entry to those from specific countries. But that will be diplomatic nightmare. Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate. That will totally mess up our “foreign policy” types.

    • Replies: @anon
    Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less!

    The fact that you can't stop 100% of something undesirable is no reason not to stop 95% of it.
    , @NC
    Oh, if it would inconvenience our foreign policy guys then we should just completely forget about it. It's much better to endure an endless onslaught of domestic terrorism than to risk a diplomatic faux pas.
    , @Hail

    Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate.
     
    Trump was talking about cutting off Muslim immigration, not stopping all Muslim entries for any purpose.

    In other words, severely curtail the number of "Farook (Sr.) the Truck Drivers" being given green cards.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "But that will be diplomatic nightmare. Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate."

    So?

    "That will totally mess up our “foreign policy” types."

    Good - an added benefit. One of the best things the US could do for itw own citizens would be to close a bunch of our consulates and embassies around the world. If we didn't have consular officials there, they couldn't be issuing visas to people from those countries.
  66. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    That’d be a good point if we gave immigrants IQ tests. Until then, it isn’t.

  67. @Vinay
    For one thing, he's not just talking about Muslim immigration, he's talking about *all* Muslim visits. That is so totally crazy it wouldn't even move the Overton window. Rather, it'll probably repel the Overton window in the *other* direction -- like Dylan Roof, who managed to achieve the previously unthinkable, getting South Carolina to abandon the Confederate flag and causing a bunch of other places to ban it.

    Bush managed to set the Sunni Arab world on fire in retaliation for 9/11 while strongly and repeatedly emphasizing religious inclusiveness. Roosevelt deployed a German American to pulverize Germany to rubble. Compare and contrast!

    For one thing, he’s not just talking about Muslim immigration, he’s talking about *all* Muslim visits. That is so totally crazy i

    Had that policy been in place in 2001, the 9-11 aviation students would never have been here.

  68. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    Wow, you must be scared completely out of your wits. The prospect of a rational response to a half-century of stupidity, which will interfere with your ability to abuse those who either created the paradise you live in here, or descended from those who did, must trouble you deeply enough to offer your idiotic post.

    The window for you to exercise your unearned privilege is closing surprisingly quickly. Maybe you should catch a ride with the clock-boy family back to the desert?

  69. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    Because we don’t need them either.

    Did you think that, just because this blog talks about IQ a lot, we would find that convincing?

  70. @Corvinus
    Mr. Anon—Wow. It’s like this Trump guy thinks that politicians should actually carry out the wishes of their constituents.

    SOME of their constituents, mind you.

    Jim Sweeney—Say a 25 year moratorium which wouold give us time to vet all those here now, deprt illegal aliens as well as radical jihadists or other similar types.

    How are YOU able to tell who are the “radical jihadists”? Do you use a magic eight ball?

    Hail—A civilization, faced with a crisis…

    Yes, a crisis involving those Muslims who are actively involved in the destruction of America. That does NOT mean every single man, woman, and child who practices Islam in the United States.

    Svigor—Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration.

    That’s anti-white.

    “How are YOU able to tell who are the “radical jihadists”? Do you use a magic eight ball?”

    No magic necessary. Start by visiting the top 50 mosques in US. Have undercover agents fluent in Arabic/English etc and secretly record various sermons each week. They were radicalized somewhere, and the mosque is usually the center of Islamic daily life. Also, some of the radicals are no strangers to social media (twitter; facebook; etc).

    “Yes, a crisis involving those Muslims who are actively involved in the destruction of America. That does NOT mean every single man, woman, and child who practices Islam in the United States.”

    Uh yep, everyone’s crying a river with ya. Boo-hoo, boo-hoo. US will be missing out on accepting thousands of Mohammeds. Shame. Pity. All that lovely vibrant diversity gone out the window. Shame. Tis. A. Shame.

  71. @Fenris
    Great Trump is for limiting muslim immigrants, and decreasing immigration. Except for when he is not for increasing H1-b visa's
    http://fusion.net/story/223664/donald-trump-mark-zuckerberg-h1b-visa-gop-debate/
    because we need to lower wages
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-wages-too-high

    On the other hand, Trump is calling for making muslims to where badges, hinting at the need for a police state, and calling defenders of freedom of speech foolish(how would that go for this side if a leftist was this authoritarian?)

    Muslim immigration is bad, muslim terrorism is bad, but muslim terrorism is relatively small threat. Perhaps having a megalomonical dishonest president who thinks tearing up the constitution is good thing, would be worse.

    The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism, Trump is exactly what every one who wants freedom in this country should fear.

    I know Trump says things that nobody else is willing to say that are true unfortunately he is only saying them because identifying a alienated and large constituency was his only path to the nomination.

    He has always been a plutocrat playing a farcical caricture of anti-plutocratic crusader, if you take him seriously as national conservative your deluding yourself. This guy was criticizing Mitt Romney 3 years ago for being too hard on immigration and losing the hispanic vote.
    http://www.redstate.com/diary/southernconstitutionalist/2015/07/19/trump-supported-path-to-citizenship-said-romney-was-mean-spirited-on-immigration/

    I hope he collapses and Ted Cruz takes his segment because while I don't trust Ted as far as I can throw him either, I think he is slightly less likely to declare a police state and nuke russia.

    Cruz can see the advance of the populist voter vein Trump has uncovered and he is not a total loose cannon.

    The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism, Trump is exactly what every one who wants freedom in this country should fear.

    Then why are you complaining about Trump’s plan to reduce Islamic terrorism?

  72. Trump is a genius politician when you think about it. As a previous commenter said, all the Republican presidential candidates have to either agree with Trump(which they won’t do), or justify Muslim immigration into the United States, which will make them look bad to the majority of Republican primary voters, particularly a week after the San Bernardino terrorist attacks.

  73. Donald Trump is truly a king among men.

    He has earned my vote.

  74. By the way, Senator Jeff Sessions just came out with numbers on the total number of green cards awarded to Muslim nations from 2009-2013. I believe it was 680,000 green cards. Sessions made the point that if we don’t change our immigration policies, we’re going to continue to get huge numbers of Muslims.

    I think this is some type of coordinated offensive against Muslim immigration, being led by Sessions. Given how close Trump is to Sessions, it wouldn’t surprise me if Sessions persuaded him to adopt this policy.

    • Replies: @Hail

    green cards awarded to Muslim nations from 2009-2013. I believe it was 680,000 green cards
     
    0.2% of the U.S. population across five years -- Not much.

    If these Muslims have a higher birthrate, reasonable to assume, this 2009-to-2013-arrived Muslim population might grow to, say, 0.5% of the population within a generation or so. This is on top of the millions of Muslims already in the U.S., perhaps exceeding 2% already by the late 2000s.

  75. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @epebble
    How would one implement it? If you have a visa application where there is a field for religion, someone who wants to come will write christian. Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less! The best he can do is stop entry to those from specific countries. But that will be diplomatic nightmare. Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate. That will totally mess up our "foreign policy" types.

    Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less!

    The fact that you can’t stop 100% of something undesirable is no reason not to stop 95% of it.

    • Replies: @epebble
    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly while plenty of innocent people will be harassed needlessly (I am talking about simple visitors, immigration is a different topic). In fact, if a Jihadi wants to come and blow up a big building, he will probably "become" a christian, read a little "Christianity For Dummies" (sadly, a used copy commands all of one cent! http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-For-Dummies-Richard-Wagner/dp/0764544829 )
  76. @Wilkey
    Cost to keep Muslims out of the country: $0
    Cost to fight 2 more wars after Muslims in the US commit terrorist atrocities: $1 trillion

    But remember, it's Donald Trump who is the extremist.

    Mainstream orthodoxy: Invade the World / Invite the World

    Bizarre extremism: Burkean prudence

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Mainstream orthodoxy: Invade the World / Invite the World

    Bizarre extremism: Burkean prudence"

    There are also Republicans who want U.S troop boots in Syria, but don't want Syrian refugees in the U.S. This is the stance of most of the Republican candidates currently running for POTUS.
    , @Desiderius
    I will vote for a President of the United States of America.

    I will vote for no more World Emperors.
    , @SEATAF
    Agreed, the orthodoxy is not prudent or moderate. But there's a difference between calling for "moratorium on immigration" or even a "moratorium on immigration from majority-Muslim countries" and calling for all Muslims to be denied entry to the United States. That is extreme. The U.S. has never had such a policy toward any religion. And the ambiguity about what Trump means--the possibility that he means even U.S. citizens may not return from a trip abroad--is not a point in its favor. If you don't have enough of a policy grasp to give even a clue of how this could work in practice, you're also not that credible. Part of me, maybe all of me, wanted to believe Trump was just the ticket, the unlikely savior, but the shark has definitely been jumped. Cold-eyed realism. But the story doesn't end there, and Douthat has been good on the potential positive upshots.
  77. Svigor—Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration.

    That’s anti-white.

    How about we only let hot eastern European women in? That’s immigration reform I can support.

    • Agree: (((Owen)))
    • Disagree: Romanian
    • Replies: @Romanian
    That's literally carpetbagging :). I vehemently disagree.
    , @ganderson
    Swedish, Czech and Slovak hockey players, too. Russians we don't need, the NBA players of the NHL.
    , @ganderson
    Swedish, Czech and Slovak hockey players, too. Russians we don't need, the NBA players of the NHL.
  78. I will bet $100 that at the end of this week Donald Trump’s poll numbers will have soared to record highs.

    Trump’s statement calling for a ban on all Moslem entry into the U.S. just locked-in my vote for him to be our next President of the United States.

    Except for JFK blockading Soviet missile shipments to Cuba and Ronald Reagan’s “Government is the problem” opposition to government bloat, Donald Trump’s ban-all-Moslem-entry statement is the most commonsensical thing an American candidate or elected official has said since Ike occupied the Oval Office.

    Meanwhile, in bold repudiation of Enemedia-Pravda’s and Left-lib-proglodytes’ rabid attacks on the Second Amendment, Americans appear to be setting records in firearms purchases.

    • Agree: Travis
  79. There is not remotely any plausible argument that it’s unconstitutional to bar immigration from people of a particular nation or religion. Of course that may not stop the SCOTUS from saying it’s unconstitutional, but such a ruling would have exactly zero basis in the actual text of the, ya know…Constitution.

    For the Left the Constitution is only useful as a means to strike down laws they don’t like. It places no limit whatsoever on any law favored by the Left.

  80. iSteveFan says:
    @Jefferson
    Democrats want mass Islamic immigration for the votes, but what the hell do RINO elites want mass Islamic immigration for? It sure as hell is not for cheap labor because Muslims are not picking fruits and vegetables in rural Central California or rural Nebraska for example. Muslim women are not becoming the nannies of rich WASP, Irish & Italian Catholic, and Jewish infidel babies. At least with Hispanics it makes more sense for why RINOs want as many of them here as possible.

    Democrats want mass Islamic immigration for the votes, but what the hell do RINO elites want mass Islamic immigration for?

    I can think of a few reasons why Republicans support muslim immigration. First, the US is seen worldwide as being extremely one-sided in our dealings with Israel and the palis. So being able to throw bones to any muslim group serves to show that we have nothing against them. In fact I thought bombing Serbia and supporting the Kosovar muslims was definitely related to this. More than likely allowing muslim immigration into the US is too.

    Second the GOP, sans the paleocons, has been on the frontline of this whole democracy-spreading business. How can you go into a place like Iraq or Afghanistan and preach the universal values of democracy, tolerance, blah, blah, blah and then tell the locals, “you can’t come to the USA”? You can’t. If you did you’d offend them and wreck your little project.

    Third, the GOP elite are products of the same Ivies as the lefties and they have been marinated in the post 60’s culture. Thus their beliefs on certain issues like immigration are similar to the left’s in that they cannot countenance discriminating against any non-white group.

    • Replies: @GP
    The agree button didn't work unless I signed up. And not being a joiner, let me share my assent thusly: people lack a political imagination. They cannot envisage something that hasn't been seen for the decades they've been around. And they believe, like Francis Fukuyama, that things are different these days, because the Internet, because coffee, because Seinfeld.

    Nothing has really changed. The barbarians are at the gates...
  81. @Fenris
    Great Trump is for limiting muslim immigrants, and decreasing immigration. Except for when he is not for increasing H1-b visa's
    http://fusion.net/story/223664/donald-trump-mark-zuckerberg-h1b-visa-gop-debate/
    because we need to lower wages
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-wages-too-high

    On the other hand, Trump is calling for making muslims to where badges, hinting at the need for a police state, and calling defenders of freedom of speech foolish(how would that go for this side if a leftist was this authoritarian?)

    Muslim immigration is bad, muslim terrorism is bad, but muslim terrorism is relatively small threat. Perhaps having a megalomonical dishonest president who thinks tearing up the constitution is good thing, would be worse.

    The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism, Trump is exactly what every one who wants freedom in this country should fear.

    I know Trump says things that nobody else is willing to say that are true unfortunately he is only saying them because identifying a alienated and large constituency was his only path to the nomination.

    He has always been a plutocrat playing a farcical caricture of anti-plutocratic crusader, if you take him seriously as national conservative your deluding yourself. This guy was criticizing Mitt Romney 3 years ago for being too hard on immigration and losing the hispanic vote.
    http://www.redstate.com/diary/southernconstitutionalist/2015/07/19/trump-supported-path-to-citizenship-said-romney-was-mean-spirited-on-immigration/

    I hope he collapses and Ted Cruz takes his segment because while I don't trust Ted as far as I can throw him either, I think he is slightly less likely to declare a police state and nuke russia.

    Cruz can see the advance of the populist voter vein Trump has uncovered and he is not a total loose cannon.

    “The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism…”

    No. Islam really is a threat. The choice presented by the Ummah is a moribund, morose Islamic society circling the drain of ambition in this life or the vicious theocratic full monty.

    Any deviation is, history shows, invariably short-lived absent overpowering externalities.

    To confuse the threat to the reaction is a classic mistake, albeit one partly enabled by the inadequacy of the current terms of political debate.

    Things will become much clearer over the next few years. Muslims are certainly helping to smash contemporary political shibboleths by hardly bothering to disguise their aims.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Muslims are certainly helping to smash contemporary political shibboleths by hardly bothering to disguise their aims.
     
    Muslims aren't very bright.

    We are playing poker with people who have very bad tells and who can't help but go all in on every hand.

    Did I just write something offensive? I don't care.
    , @Fenris
    I agree over the long run Islam is a threat due to demographics and assibiyah but currently the threat of terrorism as an actual killer is very low. Sacrificing the defining features of our societies to defend against that is crazy.

    Now I am not against banning all muslim immigration that would be great, I am not for abridging the freedom of religion of those who already live here unless we have evidence they are radicalized in which case I think we should write laws that allow us to deport those who view our nation as an enemy state.

    And I am not for the creation of police state.
  82. @Anonymous
    God bless this man. I hope enough people can denounce him in polite circles, but vote for him secretly. Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.

    I’m not exactly immune to the fear that people might think me an extremist or racist (I am using a pseudonym, after all) but if I had more faith in Trump I’d be perfectly willing to come right out and say it. I have serious doubts about him, though. I’m glad he’s widening the range of acceptable political positions. I find it hard to believe he’s all that sincere. But if he is the Republican nominee I’ll support him proudly and openly.

    • Replies: @Hail

    I find it hard to believe he’s all that sincere
     
    Why?
    , @JSM
    Thing is, what's different this time, Trump is funding his own campaign.

    I saw a video from 1988 that Trump has been thinking of the Presidency even back then.

    What if this guy is so smart that he knew way back when that, in order to self-fund his campaign so he's not beholden to The Donor Class who are ruining our country, that he knew he'd have to have a hit reality-TV show for the free name recognition and ratings-garnering in order to be able to get his TV time free for his campaign, before ever announcing?

    Maybe he is sincere. What if he's so smart and so genuinely desirous of being heralded as the Great Man who Made America Great Again, that he's spent the last ten years creating a hit reality TV show just SO he can get elected without selling his soul to the Donor Class? What if?

    What if he really *is* what he says he is? What if he really *wants to do* what he says he does? What if?
  83. @epebble
    How would one implement it? If you have a visa application where there is a field for religion, someone who wants to come will write christian. Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less! The best he can do is stop entry to those from specific countries. But that will be diplomatic nightmare. Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate. That will totally mess up our "foreign policy" types.

    Oh, if it would inconvenience our foreign policy guys then we should just completely forget about it. It’s much better to endure an endless onslaught of domestic terrorism than to risk a diplomatic faux pas.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Because the most important thing of all is that the foreign policy establishment have no impediments in getting the country into more decade long trillion dollar wars over strategic sources of gravel.
  84. Keep an eye on oil futures as those should reflect some economic aspects of the Middle East reactions.

  85. @NC
    Oh, if it would inconvenience our foreign policy guys then we should just completely forget about it. It's much better to endure an endless onslaught of domestic terrorism than to risk a diplomatic faux pas.

    Because the most important thing of all is that the foreign policy establishment have no impediments in getting the country into more decade long trillion dollar wars over strategic sources of gravel.

    • Replies: @Vinay
    Even *Israel* wouldn't implement such a policy. And all for what? Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade? Initially, Homeland Security was ridiculed for refusing to profile by ethnicity but they were repeatedly proven right.

    After 9/11, America showed that it can afford to speak softly because it carries a very big stick. Even ignoring the wars and extraordinary renditions, there was also the endless parade of hapless jihadi wanna-be incompetents baited by FBI operatives into trying to carry out their fantastical plots.

    Compared to 9/11, San Bernardino was a pretty brainless plot -- shoot your co-workers! And now we have an equally brainless response.
  86. @Wilkey
    I'm not exactly immune to the fear that people might think me an extremist or racist (I am using a pseudonym, after all) but if I had more faith in Trump I'd be perfectly willing to come right out and say it. I have serious doubts about him, though. I'm glad he's widening the range of acceptable political positions. I find it hard to believe he's all that sincere. But if he is the Republican nominee I'll support him proudly and openly.

    I find it hard to believe he’s all that sincere

    Why?

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "Why?"

    Because prior to the last year or so we've seen no evidence to indicate he believes in any of it.

    But I'm a pragmatist, and I'm willing to take what I can get.
  87. @Steve Sailer
    Mainstream orthodoxy: Invade the World / Invite the World

    Bizarre extremism: Burkean prudence

    “Mainstream orthodoxy: Invade the World / Invite the World

    Bizarre extremism: Burkean prudence”

    There are also Republicans who want U.S troop boots in Syria, but don’t want Syrian refugees in the U.S. This is the stance of most of the Republican candidates currently running for POTUS.

  88. @Fenris
    Great Trump is for limiting muslim immigrants, and decreasing immigration. Except for when he is not for increasing H1-b visa's
    http://fusion.net/story/223664/donald-trump-mark-zuckerberg-h1b-visa-gop-debate/
    because we need to lower wages
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-wages-too-high

    On the other hand, Trump is calling for making muslims to where badges, hinting at the need for a police state, and calling defenders of freedom of speech foolish(how would that go for this side if a leftist was this authoritarian?)

    Muslim immigration is bad, muslim terrorism is bad, but muslim terrorism is relatively small threat. Perhaps having a megalomonical dishonest president who thinks tearing up the constitution is good thing, would be worse.

    The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism, Trump is exactly what every one who wants freedom in this country should fear.

    I know Trump says things that nobody else is willing to say that are true unfortunately he is only saying them because identifying a alienated and large constituency was his only path to the nomination.

    He has always been a plutocrat playing a farcical caricture of anti-plutocratic crusader, if you take him seriously as national conservative your deluding yourself. This guy was criticizing Mitt Romney 3 years ago for being too hard on immigration and losing the hispanic vote.
    http://www.redstate.com/diary/southernconstitutionalist/2015/07/19/trump-supported-path-to-citizenship-said-romney-was-mean-spirited-on-immigration/

    I hope he collapses and Ted Cruz takes his segment because while I don't trust Ted as far as I can throw him either, I think he is slightly less likely to declare a police state and nuke russia.

    Cruz can see the advance of the populist voter vein Trump has uncovered and he is not a total loose cannon.

    “I hope he collapses and Ted Cruz takes his segment because while I don’t trust Ted as far as I can throw him either, I think he is slightly less likely to declare a police state and nuke russia. ”

    Didn’t you watch the last debates? Trump is the only legitimate contender that I trust not to start WW3. Every other Democratic and Republican candidate (except Paul) is openly advancing an insanely belligerent policy of confrontation towards Russia. Conventional wisdom appears to be that NOT goading a nuclear superpower that we have no natural conflicts with is somehow weird and dangerous. But letting in millions of Muslims? Well shucks, that’s as American as mom and apple pie.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?
    , @Fenris
    The issue is I don't trust Trumps positions on anything look at the evidence in my post, the saber rattling on the right and left scares the crap out of me. I'd love it if Rand Paul was viable canidate or Jim Webb but if you ask me who is more likely to make a historically dumb blunder in dealing with Russia Trump would the one I would point to.
  89. @epebble
    How would one implement it? If you have a visa application where there is a field for religion, someone who wants to come will write christian. Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less! The best he can do is stop entry to those from specific countries. But that will be diplomatic nightmare. Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate. That will totally mess up our "foreign policy" types.

    Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate.

    Trump was talking about cutting off Muslim immigration, not stopping all Muslim entries for any purpose.

    In other words, severely curtail the number of “Farook (Sr.) the Truck Drivers” being given green cards.

  90. @anon
    Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less!

    The fact that you can't stop 100% of something undesirable is no reason not to stop 95% of it.

    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly while plenty of innocent people will be harassed needlessly (I am talking about simple visitors, immigration is a different topic). In fact, if a Jihadi wants to come and blow up a big building, he will probably “become” a christian, read a little “Christianity For Dummies” (sadly, a used copy commands all of one cent! http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-For-Dummies-Richard-Wagner/dp/0764544829 )

    • Replies: @G pinfold
    You allude to a good point. ALL immigrants/visitors from suspect countries are suspect, and ALL suspect individuals from above-board countries are suspect too. This will mean suspending normal sensitivities about how we decide 'suspect countries' and 'suspect individuals'. This will require discrimination, but what else are you going to do, apart from nothing, while pointing to the road toll.
    , @anon
    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly

    Maybe, but the Jihadi can already pass through effortlessly. What Trump's plan will do is cut down on the number of second- and third-generation immigrants who get radicalized here. Like all the Somalis wanting to join ISIS.

    I'm sorry you don't like it, but it's a good plan.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    You really don't understand, do you?

    Sure, there will be another Jihadi that gets through. That the atrocity committed will increase the pressure to take even stronger measures against the Muslim community seems to be lost on you. Maybe another atrocity after its most recent predecessor will be committed. If you do not know that once enough Jihadi murderers succeed, measures will go beyond immigration. It will get ugly. And if you are a Muslim you will be caught up in the maelstrom.

    If you had a little more situational awareness you would understand the peril. Like all structural and design problems, it is better to solve the problem earlier rather than later.

    But make no mistake, the problem will be solved.
  91. integration takes time, if a group isn’t integrating well then you need to slow down the numbers and if there is already a lot of them then have a moratorium

    same as the 1920s really, too many too fast so slow it right down and allow time for integration

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    No, it's like if your car is slipping on an icy street, you need to floor the pedal to the metal because anything else would be giving in to Fear.
    , @Auntie Analogue
    "integration takes time, if a group isn’t integrating well then you need to slow down the numbers and if there is already a lot of them then have a moratorium."

    Turks and Berbers and various other Moslems have been in Germany and France since the late 1950's. Have you evidence of their "integration"?

    Wherever on earth they've gone, Moslems have never assimilated into a host country's society. Never.
  92. @JohnnyWalker123
    By the way, Senator Jeff Sessions just came out with numbers on the total number of green cards awarded to Muslim nations from 2009-2013. I believe it was 680,000 green cards. Sessions made the point that if we don't change our immigration policies, we're going to continue to get huge numbers of Muslims.

    I think this is some type of coordinated offensive against Muslim immigration, being led by Sessions. Given how close Trump is to Sessions, it wouldn't surprise me if Sessions persuaded him to adopt this policy.

    green cards awarded to Muslim nations from 2009-2013. I believe it was 680,000 green cards

    0.2% of the U.S. population across five years — Not much.

    If these Muslims have a higher birthrate, reasonable to assume, this 2009-to-2013-arrived Muslim population might grow to, say, 0.5% of the population within a generation or so. This is on top of the millions of Muslims already in the U.S., perhaps exceeding 2% already by the late 2000s.

    • Replies: @Discard
    We were assured that the 1965 Immigration Act would not change the racial composition of the country, but somehow, it did. Somebody lied. Your assurances fall on deaf ears.

    Even if we had only 2% Moslems, they'd be a problem. Look at the damage that Jews, about 3% of the population, have done.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Muslim immigrants do not disperse evenly over the country. Some communities already have a Muslim majority, others are on the way. If you're being asked by a local Muslim police officer why you're not covering your hair and why you are eating during the day during Ramadan, the fact that there aren't many Muslims nationwide won't seem immediately relevant.
  93. @NC
    "I hope he collapses and Ted Cruz takes his segment because while I don’t trust Ted as far as I can throw him either, I think he is slightly less likely to declare a police state and nuke russia. "

    Didn't you watch the last debates? Trump is the only legitimate contender that I trust not to start WW3. Every other Democratic and Republican candidate (except Paul) is openly advancing an insanely belligerent policy of confrontation towards Russia. Conventional wisdom appears to be that NOT goading a nuclear superpower that we have no natural conflicts with is somehow weird and dangerous. But letting in millions of Muslims? Well shucks, that's as American as mom and apple pie.

    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar


    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

     

    And who would this little brother of a federal judge put on the bench? Has this question even been asked?
    , @iSteveFan
    Pat Buchanan.
    , @Lot
    Larison has an excellent paleocon and pacifist foreign policy blog at amconmag.com, he'd be a good advisor. Rand Paul has the stature for State, or maybe Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina.

    Trump has hired more people for high level jobs than the last three presidents put together did before they were elected, so I would not worry too much.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    Curtis LeMay
    , @mathguy
    Carl Icahn.
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe
    Patrick Buchanan would make an outstanding Secretary of State. I'd love to see Jim Webb as Secretary of Defense. Ted Cruz is a little squirrely for my tastes, but with a little adult supervision, he might just have the talents necessary to make an amazing Attorney General. I'm kinda partial to the idea of Marine ex-General Anthony Zinni as National Security Adviser. There are a lot of interesting possibilities, once you elect a solid President.
  94. Lawrence Auster’s detailed proposal to end Islamic in-migration and encourage repatriation. “The Freedom From Islam Act“. Provisions, especially the first, are Trumpian in scope:

    [MORE]

    My purpose is not to promote hostility against Muslim persons or to spark civilizational warfare between the West and Islam, but to reduce and end the current increasing civilizational warfare, by separating Islam from the West. We respect the right of Muslims to follow in peace their religion in their lands. But in order for us Americans to follow in peace our religions and flourish in our way of life, the followers of sharia need to leave our country and return to the historic lands of Islam.

    I therefore will propose to the Congress tomorrow the following measures, which shall be called the American Freedom from Islam Act.

    With the exception of immediate family members of U.S. citizens, diplomatic personnel, and temporary visitors for business and other legitimate purposes, all entry into the United States of foreign persons known or determined to be followers of the religion of Islam, whatever their nationality or country of residence, shall cease.
    — Any Muslim person with a temporary visa for business or diplomacy who advocates or promotes jihad shall lose his visa.
    — Any resident alien who openly espouses jihad or who participates in any pro-jihad activities or organizations will lose his residency status and be deported.
    — No resident alien who adheres to, or who on investigation is reasonably suspected of adhering to, the doctrine of jihad, will be naturalized as a U.S. citizen. In order to be naturalized, Muslims will be required to state under oath that they totally reject the doctrine of jihad and have no association with pro-jihad activities and pro-jihad persons.
    — Naturalized citizens, whether they were naturalized before or after the passage of this law, who associate with jihad supporters or participate in pro-jihad activities, have shown that their oath of loyalty to the United States was fraudulent. Their citizenship shall be revoked and they shall be deported.
    — All mosques, Islamic centers and schools that promote jihad or sharia in any form will be closed.
    The United States shall encourage the voluntary departure of Muslim naturalized citizens and their native-born descendants by offering all Muslim persons over the age of eighteen $50,000 each in a one-time fee to give up any claim of U.S. residency or citizenship, to return to their native land, and never to seek to return. The federal government will assure that departing Muslims will receive a fair market price for their real property, investments, and other property that they must sell prior to leaving the United States.

  95. @anon
    integration takes time, if a group isn't integrating well then you need to slow down the numbers and if there is already a lot of them then have a moratorium

    same as the 1920s really, too many too fast so slow it right down and allow time for integration

    No, it’s like if your car is slipping on an icy street, you need to floor the pedal to the metal because anything else would be giving in to Fear.

  96. @Wilkey
    Cost to keep Muslims out of the country: $0
    Cost to fight 2 more wars after Muslims in the US commit terrorist atrocities: $1 trillion

    But remember, it's Donald Trump who is the extremist.

    One trillion for the Iraq War? I wish! That’s just the DOD direct spending, no interest included.

    From wikipedia:

    According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report published in October 2007, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost taxpayers a total of $2.4 trillion by 2017 when counting the huge interest costs because combat is being financed with borrowed money. The CBO estimated that of the $2.4 trillion long-term price tag for the war, about $1.9 trillion of that would be spent on Iraq, or $6,300 per U.S. citizen.

    “$6300 per citizen,” given that, as Mitt Romney notes, less than half of us are net tax payers, actually means $12,600 per taxpayer. A married taxpaying couple: $25,200.

    This $2.4 trillion estimate came from the CBO, which of course would be biased toward a lower number.

    Joseph Stiglitz, former chief economist of the World Bank and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, and Linda Bilmes of Harvard University, have stated the total costs of the Iraq War on the US economy will be three trillion dollars in a moderate scenario

    And of course these are only the “politically correct” costs, and the estimate was from 2008. I highly doubt they included any of the “invite the world” results of the wars.

    Also, these are just to the USA. Bush also spent down a fair amount of our good will with the UK to drag them into the war, and they had hundreds of KIAs too.

  97. @Steve Sailer
    Because the most important thing of all is that the foreign policy establishment have no impediments in getting the country into more decade long trillion dollar wars over strategic sources of gravel.

    Even *Israel* wouldn’t implement such a policy. And all for what? Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade? Initially, Homeland Security was ridiculed for refusing to profile by ethnicity but they were repeatedly proven right.

    After 9/11, America showed that it can afford to speak softly because it carries a very big stick. Even ignoring the wars and extraordinary renditions, there was also the endless parade of hapless jihadi wanna-be incompetents baited by FBI operatives into trying to carry out their fantastical plots.

    Compared to 9/11, San Bernardino was a pretty brainless plot — shoot your co-workers! And now we have an equally brainless response.

    • Replies: @Auntie Analogue
    "Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade?"

    None of those individuals was a member of a fourteen-centuries-long, uniquely and supremely intolerant "religion" with a history of bloody conquest and genocide that today has 1.6 billion Moslems, every one of whom subscribes, in varying degrees, to the Koran's command to Moslems to wage jihad (by any or every one of jihad's various methods) until the entire earth is under Islamic rule. Try Noticing such pertinent details that leap out at you - it helps you to avoid the tu quoque dodge and indulgence in moral relativism.

    This is why I loathe the term "domestic terrorist," because terrorism has a well-defined political, economic, or social objective pursued by an organized, often large, group. On the other hand most of those whom our Dear Rulers, with deliberate political-totalitarian intent, miscategorize as "domestic terrorists" belong to no large group and have no broadly supported objective of any kind, and these individuals most often do not enjoy the approval of those whose cause they claim to have committed murder to advance (e.g., the Pro-Life Movement categorically rejects individuals who claim to attack abortion clinics or abortionists to end abortion; conservatives and even White Nationalists were appalled by and universally condemned Dylann Roof's bloody mass-murder of black Americans).
    , @Daniel Williams

    Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade?
     
    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don't try to also catch meningitis.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Initially, Homeland Security was ridiculed for refusing to profile by ethnicity but they were repeatedly proven right.
     
    Really?

    Singling out the wheelchair-bound elderly for enhanced scrutiny proves them right? Delusional is the most charitable description I can think of for you. But your argument would not pass muster in middle-school debate club.

    That profiling is not 100% effective is not an argument against it use. If it was we should abolish the FDA immediately. USDA meat inspection? Why would we do that? It isn't perfect, so let's randomly select everything from boxed cereal to cans of soda pop for Escherichia Coli. That'll keep people from getting food poisoning!

    And your advocacy for randomly selecting passengers, regardless of attributes, for needless friction isn't just ineffective, it is counter-productive.

    Maybe you are not just another liberal idiot trolling for the latest chance to exhibit your stupidity. But if you are a person of good will trying to protect the innocent, the stop 'helping'.
  98. @Steve Sailer
    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

    And who would this little brother of a federal judge put on the bench? Has this question even been asked?

  99. This site has some good material, but is too low brow to link to regularly. Basically the same content but with much shorter posts, no gory photos absent warnings, and a slightly higher tone would be welcome.

    http://www.barenakedislam.com

    They have an update on the “17 year old Iraqi refugee” in Finland who Steve wrote about a few months ago and for whom the Finnish PM was all gaga for.

    http://www.barenakedislam.com/2015/12/07/finland-rape-epidemic-by-muslim-migrants-is-only-one-reason-why-finns-dont-want-more-muslim-refugees-the-majority-of-whom-are-military-age-men/

    Short version:

    He lied about his age, there are a bunch of photos of him holding military rifles, he bragged on social media about going to jail for five months for a violent assault, and has other charming social media posts like:

    “I am coming to kill you all pieces of shit”

    “Bulgaria is a piece of shit, people are shit bulgaria is shit everything there is shit”

    “I have deticated my life for allah my god and hes the first n the last.”

    “My name is fahad that means cheetah and y’all are sheep so be careful.”

    No doubt he’ll do great in Finland, thanks mainstream right!

  100. @Steve Sailer
    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

    Pat Buchanan.

  101. thats a good idea from Trump. But it should also expand to refugees, not only regular immigrants. No need to take in Sunni Muslims from countries where Sunni Muslims kill non-Sunni Muslims in huge numbers (like e.g. Syria)

  102. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Here is another eyewitness that says it was three white guys who did the shooting. This time from a Mexican guy eyewitness with no Muslim sounding last name.

    Looks like the elites were successful in dumping the Syrian refugees back onto Europe.

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/12/eyewitnesses-describe-terrorist-shooters-white.html

    That makes little logical sense. The ‘elites’ (i.e. the global organs of the State including the UN, European Commission, and the White House) want to take as many refugees as possible. This will ensure a precedent is set that whenever there is a crisis, the mass migration and free movement of peoples is not only allowed but encouraged.

    There are still unanswered questions behind San Benardino, but one thing is certain: A Muslim couple is dead, taking 14 innocent lives with them. This was not a ‘black ops’ by the CIA, it was a planned attack from people who despise the West.

  103. @Steve Sailer
    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

    Larison has an excellent paleocon and pacifist foreign policy blog at amconmag.com, he’d be a good advisor. Rand Paul has the stature for State, or maybe Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina.

    Trump has hired more people for high level jobs than the last three presidents put together did before they were elected, so I would not worry too much.

  104. I love it when people cite Steve Jobs as an example of why we need hundreds of thousands of culturally Muslim Syrians.

    Steve was a half-Syrian who grew up completely surrounded by a placid, whitebread suburban California cocoon and yet he STILL became a flaming hothead notorious for his verbal outbursts and episodes of barely contained violence.

    Now imagine Steve with his mother’s steady, patient German genes removed… Now multiply this Steve by 100,000 and raise him in a closed Islamic community and feed him anti-western propaganda…

  105. @anon
    integration takes time, if a group isn't integrating well then you need to slow down the numbers and if there is already a lot of them then have a moratorium

    same as the 1920s really, too many too fast so slow it right down and allow time for integration

    “integration takes time, if a group isn’t integrating well then you need to slow down the numbers and if there is already a lot of them then have a moratorium.”

    Turks and Berbers and various other Moslems have been in Germany and France since the late 1950’s. Have you evidence of their “integration”?

    Wherever on earth they’ve gone, Moslems have never assimilated into a host country’s society. Never.

    • Replies: @anon
    you have one line for the carnivores and a softer version for the herbivores
  106. Leftist conservative [AKA "radical_centrist"] says: • Website

    These proposed actions by a president trump would decrease the number of workers in america, and thus lead to an increase in wages for many americans, and these actions would decrease the supply of potential renters in america, thus leading to a decrease in rents chargeable by landlords, and these actions by trump would decrease the number of consumers in america…these effects would then decrease corporate profits…with decreased profits, the corporations would have less money to spend on advertisements in the corporate media…which will lead to layoffs in the media and some closures of media outlets.

    Now we know why the media hates trump.

    trump’s our man–if he can’t do it, no one can!

  107. I think Trump is smarter than anyone here is giving him credit for. If you stop and think about it, sincere guys don’t get elected to be President. They don’t have a chance, because they are too honest – they can see all the things wrong and all the corruption all around them. This deprives them of any allies, because they can’t get in bed with anyone. The Ron Paul dilemma perhaps. Trump is such a sleaze that he has no problem doing business, I think.

    So, if you think about it, who do you need on your side to get elected? #1 AIPAC. Normally, a friendly media, or at least half of it (which the Republicans and Democrats more or less split). Here Trump has forged a new path – ZFG I think it’s called. He is able to capture the public attention and the media space from his sharp truthiness – much in the spirit of the age. So, he’s skipping #2, the major media, which is risky, but seems to appeal to him.

    I think he’s caging on the visa stuff to avoid alienating the chamber of commerce – and probably doesn’t really care much about it, compared to the other issues, which is immigration immigration immigration, and foreign interventions (from what I’m picking up).

    However, what I don’t know is if he’s smart enough to remember that “personnel is policy” and whether he will remember to fire everyone in the State Department (or you know, 10% or so, pour encourager les autres..)

    • Replies: @anon
    "... is if he’s smart enough to remember that “personnel is policy” and whether he will remember to fire everyone in the State Department ..."

    I'm quite sure that he is. He might have legal problems firing them, but he shouldn't have any problems revoking their security clearances. After all, one can't be a globalist and a nationalist at the same time and they are U.S. NATIONAL security clearances, not internationalist security clearances. If I remember correctly from my time, retention of security clearance is a job requirement, so if a globalist apparatchik can't maintain their clearance they are in violation of their contract. Security clearances are neither a civil right nor a human right and the globalist enemy can't work inside government without them.

    I expect it's not so simple in practice, but there is certainly room to push here. Trump should put people in place who will PUSH PUSH PUSH constantly on every avenue. Momentum, momentum, momentum: keep the enemy reeling.
    , @BurplesonAFB
    Did you see the clip of Trump at the Republican Jewish Alliance (or whatever it's called) basically saying I know you don't support me because you want somebody you can buy favors from and that's not me
  108. @Vinay
    Even *Israel* wouldn't implement such a policy. And all for what? Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade? Initially, Homeland Security was ridiculed for refusing to profile by ethnicity but they were repeatedly proven right.

    After 9/11, America showed that it can afford to speak softly because it carries a very big stick. Even ignoring the wars and extraordinary renditions, there was also the endless parade of hapless jihadi wanna-be incompetents baited by FBI operatives into trying to carry out their fantastical plots.

    Compared to 9/11, San Bernardino was a pretty brainless plot -- shoot your co-workers! And now we have an equally brainless response.

    “Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade?”

    None of those individuals was a member of a fourteen-centuries-long, uniquely and supremely intolerant “religion” with a history of bloody conquest and genocide that today has 1.6 billion Moslems, every one of whom subscribes, in varying degrees, to the Koran’s command to Moslems to wage jihad (by any or every one of jihad’s various methods) until the entire earth is under Islamic rule. Try Noticing such pertinent details that leap out at you – it helps you to avoid the tu quoque dodge and indulgence in moral relativism.

    This is why I loathe the term “domestic terrorist,” because terrorism has a well-defined political, economic, or social objective pursued by an organized, often large, group. On the other hand most of those whom our Dear Rulers, with deliberate political-totalitarian intent, miscategorize as “domestic terrorists” belong to no large group and have no broadly supported objective of any kind, and these individuals most often do not enjoy the approval of those whose cause they claim to have committed murder to advance (e.g., the Pro-Life Movement categorically rejects individuals who claim to attack abortion clinics or abortionists to end abortion; conservatives and even White Nationalists were appalled by and universally condemned Dylann Roof’s bloody mass-murder of black Americans).

  109. There are a few hundred mass shootings per year and a few hundred million guns in the US. So guns used in mass shootings are one-in-a-million.

    There are a few Muslim mass shooters a year and several million Muslims in the US. So Muslim mass shooters are about one-in-two-million.

    Leftist logic dictates that severe gun restrictions should be pursued after every mass shooting. Why don’t they go for severe Muslim restrictions, too? Seems to me that Muslims in America have about the same chance of being involved in a mass shooting as any innocent gun…

  110. @Hail

    green cards awarded to Muslim nations from 2009-2013. I believe it was 680,000 green cards
     
    0.2% of the U.S. population across five years -- Not much.

    If these Muslims have a higher birthrate, reasonable to assume, this 2009-to-2013-arrived Muslim population might grow to, say, 0.5% of the population within a generation or so. This is on top of the millions of Muslims already in the U.S., perhaps exceeding 2% already by the late 2000s.

    We were assured that the 1965 Immigration Act would not change the racial composition of the country, but somehow, it did. Somebody lied. Your assurances fall on deaf ears.

    Even if we had only 2% Moslems, they’d be a problem. Look at the damage that Jews, about 3% of the population, have done.

    • Replies: @Hail

    Even if we had only 2% Moslems, they’d be a problem.
     
    I agree. Every country has a right to protect its ethnic core.
    , @Fun
    Ethnic cleansing campaigns for American citizens and more senseless, destructive Forever Wars in the Middle East? I can't say I'm a fan of Trump.
  111. @Hail
    Michael Barone had a column this week berating Trump. In it he comments:

    Trump has consistently run better in polls conducted by automated phone calls and over the Internet (29 percent) than in live-interview polls (23 percent).
     
    It would seem that one fifth of Trump supporters feel social pressure to keep their mouths shut when they have to confess their support to a real human, even if just over the phone. The effect may be even stronger than that, as some may not admit to being pro-Trump even in more-anonymous-seeming polls.

    (Barone's alternative theory: Non-live-interview polls are rigged by Trumpbots.)

    Easily solved. No more secret ballot. Every voter must declere before angry black census lady.

  112. Declare.. Declare.

  113. BBC Radio news headlines this morn

    Item 1 – “Trump call for all Muslims to be banned from entering US is widely condemned” – the smelling salts were much in evidence
    Item 3 – “Only 3 out of 46 UK police forces have strategies in place to address forced marriage, honour killings and female genital mutilation”
    Item 4 – “US rock band plays Paris after 86 people murdered at their last concert”

  114. @epebble
    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly while plenty of innocent people will be harassed needlessly (I am talking about simple visitors, immigration is a different topic). In fact, if a Jihadi wants to come and blow up a big building, he will probably "become" a christian, read a little "Christianity For Dummies" (sadly, a used copy commands all of one cent! http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-For-Dummies-Richard-Wagner/dp/0764544829 )

    You allude to a good point. ALL immigrants/visitors from suspect countries are suspect, and ALL suspect individuals from above-board countries are suspect too. This will mean suspending normal sensitivities about how we decide ‘suspect countries’ and ‘suspect individuals’. This will require discrimination, but what else are you going to do, apart from nothing, while pointing to the road toll.

  115. @Bill B.
    "The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism..."

    No. Islam really is a threat. The choice presented by the Ummah is a moribund, morose Islamic society circling the drain of ambition in this life or the vicious theocratic full monty.

    Any deviation is, history shows, invariably short-lived absent overpowering externalities.

    To confuse the threat to the reaction is a classic mistake, albeit one partly enabled by the inadequacy of the current terms of political debate.

    Things will become much clearer over the next few years. Muslims are certainly helping to smash contemporary political shibboleths by hardly bothering to disguise their aims.

    Muslims are certainly helping to smash contemporary political shibboleths by hardly bothering to disguise their aims.

    Muslims aren’t very bright.

    We are playing poker with people who have very bad tells and who can’t help but go all in on every hand.

    Did I just write something offensive? I don’t care.

  116. @iSteveFan

    Democrats want mass Islamic immigration for the votes, but what the hell do RINO elites want mass Islamic immigration for?
     
    I can think of a few reasons why Republicans support muslim immigration. First, the US is seen worldwide as being extremely one-sided in our dealings with Israel and the palis. So being able to throw bones to any muslim group serves to show that we have nothing against them. In fact I thought bombing Serbia and supporting the Kosovar muslims was definitely related to this. More than likely allowing muslim immigration into the US is too.

    Second the GOP, sans the paleocons, has been on the frontline of this whole democracy-spreading business. How can you go into a place like Iraq or Afghanistan and preach the universal values of democracy, tolerance, blah, blah, blah and then tell the locals, "you can't come to the USA"? You can't. If you did you'd offend them and wreck your little project.

    Third, the GOP elite are products of the same Ivies as the lefties and they have been marinated in the post 60's culture. Thus their beliefs on certain issues like immigration are similar to the left's in that they cannot countenance discriminating against any non-white group.

    The agree button didn’t work unless I signed up. And not being a joiner, let me share my assent thusly: people lack a political imagination. They cannot envisage something that hasn’t been seen for the decades they’ve been around. And they believe, like Francis Fukuyama, that things are different these days, because the Internet, because coffee, because Seinfeld.

    Nothing has really changed. The barbarians are at the gates…

  117. Um, replying to Bill B in the comment above.

  118. Marco Rubio’s response on twitter:

    “I disagree with Donald Trump’s latest proposal. His habit of making offensive and outlandish statements will not bring Americans together.”

    Of course he does not bother to say what is so “offensive and outlandish” about a moratorium, since it’s obvious whatever screening is in place failed in the case of the woman in San Bernardino. Here I think Trump could easily reply in a completely reasonable way that would shut an idiot like Rubio up.

    • Replies: @David
    Interesting to consider how "outlandish" took on its meaning.
  119. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    “In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative” – And no one doubts that for a second here. They obviously want to promote and protect their way of life. And in their countries, we have no problems with that.

    “Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well.” – Ok, Christians I can understand, but Right-wing Atheists that want to kill gays?

    “All the things they fear Muslims doing – they themselves will do.” – Well, probably not the suicide bombings.

  120. Consider: annual US immigration in the ’70s averaged around 400,000 immigrants per year. Since 9/11, Muslim immigration to the US has averaged around 130,000 per year. So currently we are taking in 1/3 as many Muslim immigrants every year as we took in immigrants from everywhere just 40 years ago, yet we’re being told that it’s ridiculous to think that we can reduce Muslim immigration.

  121. @Hail

    I find it hard to believe he’s all that sincere
     
    Why?

    “Why?”

    Because prior to the last year or so we’ve seen no evidence to indicate he believes in any of it.

    But I’m a pragmatist, and I’m willing to take what I can get.

    • Agree: Vendetta
  122. Politically playing nice with Muslims is not going to get the GOP anywhere, it is certainly not going to help them win any elections. Mitt Romney never publicly said anything negative about Muslims like Donald Trump has, yet Mitt Romney still only won a pathetically low 4 percent of the Muslim vote in the 2012 presidential elections, even though he ran as a political moderate and not as a far Right Winger.

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Romney only appeared moderate to GOP base voters, the mainstream believed what the media told them, and had the benefit of Romney's intemperate remarks.

    "Severe conservative"
    "47 percent"
    Paul Ryan's Medicare "vouchers"
  123. @Hail

    green cards awarded to Muslim nations from 2009-2013. I believe it was 680,000 green cards
     
    0.2% of the U.S. population across five years -- Not much.

    If these Muslims have a higher birthrate, reasonable to assume, this 2009-to-2013-arrived Muslim population might grow to, say, 0.5% of the population within a generation or so. This is on top of the millions of Muslims already in the U.S., perhaps exceeding 2% already by the late 2000s.

    Muslim immigrants do not disperse evenly over the country. Some communities already have a Muslim majority, others are on the way. If you’re being asked by a local Muslim police officer why you’re not covering your hair and why you are eating during the day during Ramadan, the fact that there aren’t many Muslims nationwide won’t seem immediately relevant.

  124. Yojimbo/Zatoichi…

    “No magic necessary. Start by visiting the top 50 mosques in US. Have undercover agents fluent in Arabic/English etc and secretly record various sermons each week. They were radicalized somewhere, and the mosque is usually the center of Islamic daily life. Also, some of the radicals are no strangers to social media (twitter; facebook; etc).”

    What do you think our intelligence apparatus has been doing? And, yet, where are those widespread, spiderweb Muzzie terror cells you seem fascinated about? Millions of our Muslims are not heeding the call of Jihad. I wonder why…

    Auntie Analogue…

    “None of those individuals was a member of a fourteen-centuries-long, uniquely and supremely intolerant “religion” with a history of bloody conquest and genocide that today has 1.6 billion Moslems,”

    Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history.

    “every one of whom subscribes, in varying degrees, to the Koran’s command to Moslems to wage jihad (by any or every one of jihad’s various methods) until the entire earth is under Islamic rule.”

    Assuming that EVERY Muslim interprets jihad as war against Christians, either through overt and covert means. That command, however, is no different, that when conservatives, liberals, da Joos, communists, socialists, atheists, etc. desire a world entirely of “their own kind” through the power of the pen, the power of law, or the power of the gun.

    g Pinfold–“ALL immigrants/visitors from suspect countries are suspect, and ALL suspect individuals from above-board countries are suspect too.”

    Your logic is suspect. Living in fear of what could happen ain’t no way to live.

    • Replies: @Daniel Williams

    Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history [as Islam].
     
    Even if that were true, it's irrelevant. Islam's bloody, violent, and intolerant history is ongoing.

    Christian fundamentalist fanatics take their kids out of public school. Muslims fundamentalists decapitate apostates.
    , @Auntie Analogue

    "Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history."
     
    My dear Corvinus, your own sentence shoots down its own tu quoque [non]-argument: "was" being its operative verb. Today Christian churches', Jewish groups' and secular and foreigner-run groups' "Refugee" Resettlement Racket VOLAG's rake in multi-millions of taxpayer dollars to Import Moslems and impose them and their costs upon us Americans.

    "Assuming that EVERY Muslim interprets jihad as war against Christians, either through overt and covert means. That command, however, is no different, that when conservatives, liberals, da Joos, communists, socialists, atheists, etc. desire a world entirely of 'their own kind' through the power of the pen, the power of law, or the power of the gun."

     

    I do not "desire a world entirely of their own kind." I want not to be forced to pay to Import and not to be forced to pay to support Islam & Moslems, as neither Islam, nor Moslems, have contributed a single positive thing to the United States and have instead been nothing but a drain on taxpayers and a menace in their pursuit of one or more of the forms of jihad.

    Further, I don't today see "conservatives, liberals, da Joos" desiring a "world entirely of their own kind." I grant you that's what communists, socialists and a proportion of atheists do desire and have been caviling to attain. The fact remains that the Koran commands all Moslems to perform one or more of jihad's forms to attain global Islamic rule: no other religion claims or is based on such a command from its deity. In fact, no other religion but Islam divides the people of the world into "the House of Submission [Islam]" and "the House of War [kuffar]." Right there lies a sound reason not to Import and to deport Moslems, as Islam's doctrine rejects Western pluralism.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Millions of our Muslims are not heeding the call of Jihad. I wonder why…
     
    Because they're apostates.
  125. @eah
    Marco Rubio’s response on twitter:

    "I disagree with Donald Trump’s latest proposal. His habit of making offensive and outlandish statements will not bring Americans together.”

    Of course he does not bother to say what is so “offensive and outlandish” about a moratorium, since it’s obvious whatever screening is in place failed in the case of the woman in San Bernardino. Here I think Trump could easily reply in a completely reasonable way that would shut an idiot like Rubio up.

    Interesting to consider how “outlandish” took on its meaning.

    • Replies: @Hail
    Word Origin and History for outlandish

    adj.

    Old English utlendisc "of a foreign country, not native," from utland "foreign land," literally "outland" (see out + land (n.)) + -ish. Sense of "unfamiliar, strange, odd, bizarre" (such as the customs of foreigners may seem to natives) is attested from 1590s.
    Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper
     

  126. Anyone catch Walter Huston’s propaganda film “Pearl Harbor” yesterday on TCM? It dealt with the dilemma posed by Japanese-Americans in Hawaii as the US prepared to enter WW2. It was a time machine that pondered the implications of ‘hyphenated Americans’. 37% of Hawaii’s population was of Japanese descent and while, outwardly, the Japanese-American community professed allegiance to the US there was no doubt a 5th column amongst them such that the US military had a ‘grab list’ of locals who would be arrested upon the outbreak of war. Recommended viewing for those who want to see a well done film that is as timely today as it was then!

  127. How many Japanese and German citizens were allowed to visit the United States after December 1941?

  128. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    We kick puppies, too.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    Classic "Agree and Amplify."
  129. @Anonymous
    God bless this man. I hope enough people can denounce him in polite circles, but vote for him secretly. Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.

    Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.

    Dude, you need to start hanging out with a better class of people.

  130. Another case for Steve’s National Immigrant Safety Board.

    If Trump gets too much heat on this and needs to stress that he is only talking about a temporary thing, I guess he could make the analogy that Steve often makes.

    If a particular type of plane crashes, authorities will often suspend other planes of the same type from flying until they figure out what the hell went wrong. Even if there is nothing wrong with the other planes, they are still grounded until the cause of the accident is established so that there is less chance of it happening again.

    Letting Tashfeen Malik into the country was a huge mistake. Trump should be able to argue it makes sense to suspend other people with the same distinguishing characteristic from entering the country until you find out what caused the mistake that allowed her in. Even if there is nothing wrong with most of the people you suspend from entering, they are still barred until the case of the mistake is established so that there is less chance of it happening again

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191

    It turned out in 1979 that DC-10s really were fundamentally flawed due to an unrealistic design philosophy, but there were 400 of them. So American Airlines took the liability hit for the 271 people killed on takeoff from O'Hare by letting be blamed on poor maintenance and the government ordered better maintenance so airlines wouldn't have to write off their vast investment. They kept crashing, but not as often as they would have without all the inspections.

  131. On this (pathetic) side of the pond, politicians of all parties have lined up to express their shock/horror/outrage at Trump’s words, with many demanding that he be barred from entering the multicultural paradise that is modern Bwitain for “hate speech”:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/dec/08/tom-watson-says-momentum-entryists-could-damage-labour-politics-live

  132. @Mr. Anon
    "Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)"

    Why? Why is the default assumption that we have to admit somebody? We don't have to admit any of them. So let's not.

    Admit as visitors, not as migrants

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    Admit as visitors, not as migrants

    Why? They can go to Mecca instead of Disneyland.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Admit as visitors, not as migrants."

    Why should we admit them as visitors? We don't need them. Do you let anyone into your house who might want to come in?
  133. @Aloha
    Another case for Steve's National Immigrant Safety Board.

    If Trump gets too much heat on this and needs to stress that he is only talking about a temporary thing, I guess he could make the analogy that Steve often makes.

    If a particular type of plane crashes, authorities will often suspend other planes of the same type from flying until they figure out what the hell went wrong. Even if there is nothing wrong with the other planes, they are still grounded until the cause of the accident is established so that there is less chance of it happening again.

    Letting Tashfeen Malik into the country was a huge mistake. Trump should be able to argue it makes sense to suspend other people with the same distinguishing characteristic from entering the country until you find out what caused the mistake that allowed her in. Even if there is nothing wrong with most of the people you suspend from entering, they are still barred until the case of the mistake is established so that there is less chance of it happening again

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191

    It turned out in 1979 that DC-10s really were fundamentally flawed due to an unrealistic design philosophy, but there were 400 of them. So American Airlines took the liability hit for the 271 people killed on takeoff from O’Hare by letting be blamed on poor maintenance and the government ordered better maintenance so airlines wouldn’t have to write off their vast investment. They kept crashing, but not as often as they would have without all the inspections.

  134. Trump’s a serious nut job. His followers are probably similar or worse. Truly sad state of affairs for the GOP if he actually becomes the candidate for presidency. Would need probably several more Islamist terror attacks in the US to actually make him president.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Trump’s a serious nut job. His followers are probably similar or worse."

    You seem to be exceptionally dull-witted.

    "Truly sad state of affairs for the GOP if he actually becomes the candidate for presidency."

    Yeah, what the GOP really needs is a genius like Marco Rubio, or sage elder-statesman Jeb Bush.

    Cuck.
  135. @PistolPete
    It's a-happenin'...Trump is gonna bring this country back to Sanity.. amazing a batshit crazy new yorker had to do it, but maybe that makes it even better...

    Careful he's not too successful, Steve. He could put you outta business if your ideas/worldview become too mainstream....

    Keep at it Steve-o you're doing God's work...

    Are you kidding? If Trump is even moderately successful, we Middle Class White Americans will erect a statue to Steve, and put him to work as a hero and National Treasure, never to want for anything.

    Right now Steve is poor and has to beg for donations. But within three years of a Trump Presidency having well and truly broken the dam of Political Correctness, Steve will be a Rock Star, with bigger draw numbers than the Pope.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    But within three years of a Trump Presidency having well and truly broken the dam of Political Correctness, Steve will be a Rock Star, with bigger draw numbers than the Pope.
     
    Yeah, right. When the Berlin Wall came down, did they celebrate with those who risked their careers and lives to oppose Communism? No. They invited Crosby, Stills, and Nash.

    CS&N! Who once called Ohioans in uniform "tin soldiers".
  136. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    So, you think Nidal Hasan, a U.S. Army major and psychiatrist<, a Muslim who shouted Allahu Akbar fatally shot 13 people and injured more than 30 others on a US Army base, was dumb?

  137. WhatEvvs [AKA "Internet Addict"] says:

    A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country.

    http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/006198.html

    We will have terrorist attacks and threats of terrorists attacks and inconvenient and humiliating security measures and the disruption of ordinary activities FOREVER, as long as Muslims are in the West in any significant numbers. The Muslim terrorists are part and parcel of the Muslim community. According to a survey reported in the Scotsman, 24 percent of Muslims in Britain (I never describe them as “British Muslims”) believe the July 2005 London bombings were justified. Imagine that. Not only do these Muslims in Britain support terrorism against Britain, they’re not afraid to say so openly to a pollster! The unchangeable fact is that wherever there is a sizable Muslim community there will be a very large number of terror supporters and therefore—inevitably—actual terrorists as well.

    This is our future, FOREVER, unless we stop Muslim immigration and initiate a steady out-migration of Muslims from the West until their remaining numbers are a small fraction of what they are now and there are no true believers among the ones that remain. Travelers from Muslim countries must be tightly restricted as well. Muslims must be essentially locked up inside the Muslim lands, with only carefully screened individuals allowed into the non-Muslim world.

  138. Part of Trump’s political genius is asking for “three times more than he really wants,” thereby putting the issue on the table.

  139. @Ttjy

    Svigor—Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration.

    That’s anti-white.
     
    How about we only let hot eastern European women in? That's immigration reform I can support.

    That’s literally carpetbagging :). I vehemently disagree.

  140. WhatEvvs [AKA "Internet Addict"] says:

    Have you noticed the argument about “radicalization”? First they were saying that she “radicalized” him. Last night I watched the chump who is leading the investigation give a presser and he claimed they “radicalized” each other.

    Beware of this – it’s all lies and obfuscation. Radicalization occurs when a kid learns the Quran.

  141. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    Most of the Muslim terrorists in the West seem to have been engineers or had other professional training. Maybe some of the Paris attackers were low IQ drones.

  142. @andy
    Admit as visitors, not as migrants

    Admit as visitors, not as migrants

    Why? They can go to Mecca instead of Disneyland.

  143. @Hunsdon
    We kick puppies, too.

    Classic “Agree and Amplify.”

  144. Leftist conservative [AKA "radical_centrist"] says: • Website

    why corpgovmedia hates trump–if he gets in and starts cutting back on mass immigration, the whole growth/debt-based ponzi scheme will take a huge hit like it did in 2008….once too many people opt out and lose faith, the big players will lose billions, even trillions. And the media’s business model is already taking a huge hit from the internet, so another big hit on corporate profits will close down a lot of media outlets or at least force them to make big layoffs. Hence the media’s constant attacks on trump…

    To keep it all going requires eternal growth…hence corpgovmedia’s vicious hatred at anything that threatens mass immigration….and muslim immigration is a big source of growth.

    • Replies: @anon

    why corpgovmedia hates trump–if he gets in and starts cutting back on mass immigration, the whole growth/debt-based ponzi scheme will take a huge hit like it did in 2008….To keep it all going requires eternal growth…hence corpgovmedia’s vicious hatred at anything that threatens mass immigration….and muslim immigration is a big source of growth.
     
    You are right that is what they believe but they're wrong.

    Mass immigration is deflationary and the *cause* of the slow growth.

    If mass immigration goes down (or reversed) and employment and wages go up then growth will return.
  145. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @StAugustine
    I think Trump is smarter than anyone here is giving him credit for. If you stop and think about it, sincere guys don't get elected to be President. They don't have a chance, because they are too honest - they can see all the things wrong and all the corruption all around them. This deprives them of any allies, because they can't get in bed with anyone. The Ron Paul dilemma perhaps. Trump is such a sleaze that he has no problem doing business, I think.

    So, if you think about it, who do you need on your side to get elected? #1 AIPAC. Normally, a friendly media, or at least half of it (which the Republicans and Democrats more or less split). Here Trump has forged a new path - ZFG I think it's called. He is able to capture the public attention and the media space from his sharp truthiness - much in the spirit of the age. So, he's skipping #2, the major media, which is risky, but seems to appeal to him.

    I think he's caging on the visa stuff to avoid alienating the chamber of commerce - and probably doesn't really care much about it, compared to the other issues, which is immigration immigration immigration, and foreign interventions (from what I'm picking up).

    However, what I don't know is if he's smart enough to remember that "personnel is policy" and whether he will remember to fire everyone in the State Department (or you know, 10% or so, pour encourager les autres..)

    “… is if he’s smart enough to remember that “personnel is policy” and whether he will remember to fire everyone in the State Department …”

    I’m quite sure that he is. He might have legal problems firing them, but he shouldn’t have any problems revoking their security clearances. After all, one can’t be a globalist and a nationalist at the same time and they are U.S. NATIONAL security clearances, not internationalist security clearances. If I remember correctly from my time, retention of security clearance is a job requirement, so if a globalist apparatchik can’t maintain their clearance they are in violation of their contract. Security clearances are neither a civil right nor a human right and the globalist enemy can’t work inside government without them.

    I expect it’s not so simple in practice, but there is certainly room to push here. Trump should put people in place who will PUSH PUSH PUSH constantly on every avenue. Momentum, momentum, momentum: keep the enemy reeling.

  146. @Steve Sailer
    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

    Curtis LeMay

  147. Here is something I didn’t know (from Wikipedia):

    The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), based in Plainfield, Indiana, USA, is a Muslim umbrella group. It has been described in the media as the largest Muslim organization in North America.[1][2][3]

    ISNA has often been at the center of harsh criticism for its alleged ties to extremist and terrorist groups in the U.S.

    https://goo.gl/wOB8mX

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    We have quite a terror hotbed here in the People's Commonwealth:

    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=7797

    Their loony imam wasn't loony enough for them:

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/26/moderate-imam-reveals-how-radicals-won-battle-for-soul-boston-mosques/
    , @WhatEvvs
    France has founded ISIS propaganda and Kalashnikovs in mosque raids. Why now? Why not after Charlie Hebdo? In fact, why not before CH?

    I wonder what we'd find if we raided a bunch of mosques here? Or perhaps such raids go on all the time and we don't hear about them. That's my guess.
  148. @bossel
    Trump's a serious nut job. His followers are probably similar or worse. Truly sad state of affairs for the GOP if he actually becomes the candidate for presidency. Would need probably several more Islamist terror attacks in the US to actually make him president.

    “Trump’s a serious nut job. His followers are probably similar or worse.”

    You seem to be exceptionally dull-witted.

    “Truly sad state of affairs for the GOP if he actually becomes the candidate for presidency.”

    Yeah, what the GOP really needs is a genius like Marco Rubio, or sage elder-statesman Jeb Bush.

    Cuck.

  149. Then there is Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), which Wikipedia describes as “smaller and more conservative than the Islamic Society of North America. . .” This is the organization to which the mother of the San Bernadino killer has been linked.

    Jeesh, I find it hard to believe that these two organizations are allowed to continue to operate in the United States post 9/11! Where have the last two administrations been on this? Can we chalk it up to the Saudi effect?

    In any case, it appears Trump may be onto something.

  150. @Ttjy

    Svigor—Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration.

    That’s anti-white.
     
    How about we only let hot eastern European women in? That's immigration reform I can support.

    Swedish, Czech and Slovak hockey players, too. Russians we don’t need, the NBA players of the NHL.

    • Replies: @Another Canadian
    The Russians are nothin'! Nothin'!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raEgZDBk-ys
  151. @Ttjy

    Svigor—Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration.

    That’s anti-white.
     
    How about we only let hot eastern European women in? That's immigration reform I can support.

    Swedish, Czech and Slovak hockey players, too. Russians we don’t need, the NBA players of the NHL.

  152. Part of the success of the pro-immigration side is that in spite of not being monolithic, they have held together as a lobby. This is why their position is for “comprehensive” reform. If they don’t hang together they will hang separately. The high tech HB1 lobby, stoop labor / hotel maid lobby, family reunification (ethnics) lobby, white liberals really don’t have much in common with each other but they have figured out that if one group is thwarted, it is no longer unthinkable that the others can be stopped as well. Putting the kibosh on Muslim immigration will set off a chain reaction that will reform the rest of the system.

  153. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    X is identical to Y. We are in favor of more of Y and less X. When X tries to prevent more of Y, X is showing it’s affinity to Y.

    Do I understand you correctly? Is that even possible?

  154. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @epebble
    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly while plenty of innocent people will be harassed needlessly (I am talking about simple visitors, immigration is a different topic). In fact, if a Jihadi wants to come and blow up a big building, he will probably "become" a christian, read a little "Christianity For Dummies" (sadly, a used copy commands all of one cent! http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-For-Dummies-Richard-Wagner/dp/0764544829 )

    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly

    Maybe, but the Jihadi can already pass through effortlessly. What Trump’s plan will do is cut down on the number of second- and third-generation immigrants who get radicalized here. Like all the Somalis wanting to join ISIS.

    I’m sorry you don’t like it, but it’s a good plan.

    • Replies: @anon
    plus guerrillas need a jungle to hide in

    ethnic enclaves are their jungle
    , @epebble
    I am not against the idea; I am just questioning how you will prevent Mohammed Ahmed coming over to Chicago on a U.K. Passport as a 90 day visitor to try to blow up Sears tower using a fertilizer truck. What filter will Homeland security use at JFK to declare him inadmissible and send him back to London? Mohammed works as a chemical engineer in U.K. for Bayer Ltd.

    The only "test" Krauthammer mentioned ( in jest ) was asking him to eat a ham sandwich. Do you have a better test?
  155. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    They should pose this question to their below average/low IQ coreligionists, i.e., the majority of them.

  156. @Luke Lea
    Here is something I didn't know (from Wikipedia):

    The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), based in Plainfield, Indiana, USA, is a Muslim umbrella group. It has been described in the media as the largest Muslim organization in North America.[1][2][3]

    ISNA has often been at the center of harsh criticism for its alleged ties to extremist and terrorist groups in the U.S.

    https://goo.gl/wOB8mX

    We have quite a terror hotbed here in the People’s Commonwealth:

    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=7797

    Their loony imam wasn’t loony enough for them:

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/26/moderate-imam-reveals-how-radicals-won-battle-for-soul-boston-mosques/

  157. @Anonymous
    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists. In fact I would say that since Islamic terrorism are themselves extremely conservative, I'm not even saying that "Islamism" and right-wing groups in the west have a symbiotic relationship.... I would say that they are in fact the same thing.

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They're the fucking same. After Trump rises to power and starts tearing apart the Constitution you'll all see, only the allegedly constitutionalist conservatives in the US will be too busy cheering him on. All the things they've criticized Obama for allegedly doing, they themselves will do. All the things they fear Muslims doing - they themselves will do.

    Somewhere in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden is laughing his fucking ass off.

    Islamic terrorism is good for extreme right wing. This is also why Trump is surging. As people get afraid of Muslims and The Enemies Of The Nation/Party/People/White Race/West, they more eagerly vote for tough-talking authoritarians and fascists.[…]

    There are right-wing Muslims who want to kill the gays. Right-wing Christians or atheists who do as well. Both groups are anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc. They’re the fucking same.

    I take it that we can assume that you are pro-democracy, pro-progress, pro-equality, pro-liberal, pro-women, etc.? And, considering that your little vent is in response to a call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, that at the same time you disapprove of restrictions on Muslim immigration into the West?

    So, why exactly are you in favor of a policy that is obviously leading to the dreaded Fear of the Other and consequent rising support for “tough-talking authoritarians and fascists” who are “anti-democracy, anti-progress, anti-equality, anti-liberal, anti-women, etc”?

    It is a perennial puzzle why “pro-democracy, pro-progress, pro-equality, pro-liberal, pro-women, etc.” folks like you are so enthusiastic in promoting policies that, by your own description, bring about the conditions that destroy the very things you claim to value.

  158. @Anonymous
    God bless this man. I hope enough people can denounce him in polite circles, but vote for him secretly. Unfortunately openly supporting him is social death, I can attest.

    Eff “social death.” That’s what it takes. Your social circle now hates Harry Truman too.

  159. Svigor—Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration.

    That’s anti-white.

    My goodness, you’re so clever!

    That is the only effective demand.

    But it should always be worded so that it’s plain that a blanket moratorium was made necessary by the left, who opposed a selective moratorium as raciss; everyone should know who ruined it for everyone.

    High IQ Muslims are actually more dangerous than the retarded muslims. The problem with muslims is their ideology combined with their clannish behavior. The more intelligent muslims pose a much higher risk to Americans, as they have the ability to wage more efficient jihad and cause more death and destruction than the typical low IQ muslims.

    I’ve been saying much the same about Tikkun Olam for years.

    Because high IQ muslims should stay behind to bring their countries into the 21st century. How are they ever going to advance if the colonial powers keep extracting their top human resources?

    Not to mention the fact that letting in 3rd world talent is laying the groundwork for the argument that the west “stole” all their best and brightest, so “give us all your stuff and let us all immigrate.”

    Uh yep, everyone’s crying a river with ya. Boo-hoo, boo-hoo. US will be missing out on accepting thousands of Mohammeds. Shame. Pity. All that lovely vibrant diversity gone out the window. Shame. Tis. A. Shame.

    Racist. Remember, for every Malik and Hassan, there’s a Clock Boy.

    I can think of a few reasons why Republicans support muslim immigration.

    Fourth (or maybe first), they’re all beholden to the open-borders oligarch class, which brooks no dissent on its policy of “invite the world.” Un-inviting anyone sets a dangerous precedent.

    Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history.

    Christianity does not have as bloody and violent a history as Islam. Islam went from zero to Jihad in about sixty seconds.

    Your logic is suspect. Living in fear of what could happen ain’t no way to live.

    Indeed, leftists should stop living in fear and embrace Rightism.

    Trump’s a serious nut job. His followers are probably similar or worse. Truly sad state of affairs for the GOP if he actually becomes the candidate for presidency. Would need probably several more Islamist terror attacks in the US to actually make him president.

    So, millions of Americans who support Trump are “serious nut jobs or worse,” because Trump rhetoric, but Muslims are wonderful, because Malik, Hasan, and Atta. Gotcha.

  160. Which came first? The Monmouth poll or Trump’s no Muslims announcement?
    Ignore this attention whore. Bad for America, bad for white people.

  161. @Discard
    We were assured that the 1965 Immigration Act would not change the racial composition of the country, but somehow, it did. Somebody lied. Your assurances fall on deaf ears.

    Even if we had only 2% Moslems, they'd be a problem. Look at the damage that Jews, about 3% of the population, have done.

    Even if we had only 2% Moslems, they’d be a problem.

    I agree. Every country has a right to protect its ethnic core.

  162. @David
    Interesting to consider how "outlandish" took on its meaning.

    Word Origin and History for outlandish

    adj.

    Old English utlendiscof a foreign country, not native,” from utland “foreign land,” literally “outland” (see out + land (n.)) + -ish. Sense of “unfamiliar, strange, odd, bizarre” (such as the customs of foreigners may seem to natives) is attested from 1590s.
    Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper

  163. Except for Rand Paul, all the Republican candidates are condemning Trump now, calling him crazy, unhinged, racist, etc. But didn’t they all pledge to support whoever ends up as their party’s nominee? So after saying all these damning things about Trump, they’re going to support him?

    Or maybe they figure there’s an Arthur Bremer or Sirhan Sirhan who will handle it for them.

  164. Obviously all 7 billion people in the world have a right to immigrate to the West.

    However, Representative Hank Johnson is worried that the West will capsize, like he feared would happen to Guam.

    So we need to displace some weight back to the rest of the world.

    So send all of those reactionary cishet Christian privileged whites, I mean ALL of them, out to the rest of the world (now empty) and lock them up on one of the continents by themselves and put a wall around them.

    I’ll have a coke

    http://cbsn.ws/1TYQQhR

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    However, Representative Hank Johnson is worried that the West will capsize, like he feared would happen to Guam.
     
    Are you sure he wasn't kidding? I'm not.
  165. @JSM
    Are you kidding? If Trump is even moderately successful, we Middle Class White Americans will erect a statue to Steve, and put him to work as a hero and National Treasure, never to want for anything.

    Right now Steve is poor and has to beg for donations. But within three years of a Trump Presidency having well and truly broken the dam of Political Correctness, Steve will be a Rock Star, with bigger draw numbers than the Pope.

    But within three years of a Trump Presidency having well and truly broken the dam of Political Correctness, Steve will be a Rock Star, with bigger draw numbers than the Pope.

    Yeah, right. When the Berlin Wall came down, did they celebrate with those who risked their careers and lives to oppose Communism? No. They invited Crosby, Stills, and Nash.

    CS&N! Who once called Ohioans in uniform “tin soldiers”.

  166. @Steve Sailer
    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

    Carl Icahn.

  167. @Vinay
    Even *Israel* wouldn't implement such a policy. And all for what? Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade? Initially, Homeland Security was ridiculed for refusing to profile by ethnicity but they were repeatedly proven right.

    After 9/11, America showed that it can afford to speak softly because it carries a very big stick. Even ignoring the wars and extraordinary renditions, there was also the endless parade of hapless jihadi wanna-be incompetents baited by FBI operatives into trying to carry out their fantastical plots.

    Compared to 9/11, San Bernardino was a pretty brainless plot -- shoot your co-workers! And now we have an equally brainless response.

    Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade?

    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don’t try to also catch meningitis.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don’t try to also catch meningitis.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI0euMFAWF8
    , @Steve Sailer
    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don’t try to also catch meningitis.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI0euMFAWF8
    , @Mr. Anon
    "If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don’t try to also catch meningitis."

    Quite right. That argument has always puzzled me. Yes, we already have our own murderers, rapists, conmen, thieves, and drunk-drivers. So why should we want to import still more?
  168. @Vinay
    Steve, care to share your opinion on this? Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?

    Steve, care to share your opinion on this? Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?

    Actually, it stops well short of what is necessary.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    This is classic art of the deal. Push to ban immigration of all Muslims, settle for banning only certain countries.
  169. @Andy
    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    Why? What’s in it for us?

  170. @StAugustine
    I think Trump is smarter than anyone here is giving him credit for. If you stop and think about it, sincere guys don't get elected to be President. They don't have a chance, because they are too honest - they can see all the things wrong and all the corruption all around them. This deprives them of any allies, because they can't get in bed with anyone. The Ron Paul dilemma perhaps. Trump is such a sleaze that he has no problem doing business, I think.

    So, if you think about it, who do you need on your side to get elected? #1 AIPAC. Normally, a friendly media, or at least half of it (which the Republicans and Democrats more or less split). Here Trump has forged a new path - ZFG I think it's called. He is able to capture the public attention and the media space from his sharp truthiness - much in the spirit of the age. So, he's skipping #2, the major media, which is risky, but seems to appeal to him.

    I think he's caging on the visa stuff to avoid alienating the chamber of commerce - and probably doesn't really care much about it, compared to the other issues, which is immigration immigration immigration, and foreign interventions (from what I'm picking up).

    However, what I don't know is if he's smart enough to remember that "personnel is policy" and whether he will remember to fire everyone in the State Department (or you know, 10% or so, pour encourager les autres..)

    Did you see the clip of Trump at the Republican Jewish Alliance (or whatever it’s called) basically saying I know you don’t support me because you want somebody you can buy favors from and that’s not me

  171. @Corvinus
    Yojimbo/Zatoichi...

    "No magic necessary. Start by visiting the top 50 mosques in US. Have undercover agents fluent in Arabic/English etc and secretly record various sermons each week. They were radicalized somewhere, and the mosque is usually the center of Islamic daily life. Also, some of the radicals are no strangers to social media (twitter; facebook; etc)."

    What do you think our intelligence apparatus has been doing? And, yet, where are those widespread, spiderweb Muzzie terror cells you seem fascinated about? Millions of our Muslims are not heeding the call of Jihad. I wonder why...

    Auntie Analogue...

    "None of those individuals was a member of a fourteen-centuries-long, uniquely and supremely intolerant “religion” with a history of bloody conquest and genocide that today has 1.6 billion Moslems,"

    Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history.

    "every one of whom subscribes, in varying degrees, to the Koran’s command to Moslems to wage jihad (by any or every one of jihad’s various methods) until the entire earth is under Islamic rule."

    Assuming that EVERY Muslim interprets jihad as war against Christians, either through overt and covert means. That command, however, is no different, that when conservatives, liberals, da Joos, communists, socialists, atheists, etc. desire a world entirely of "their own kind" through the power of the pen, the power of law, or the power of the gun.

    g Pinfold--"ALL immigrants/visitors from suspect countries are suspect, and ALL suspect individuals from above-board countries are suspect too."

    Your logic is suspect. Living in fear of what could happen ain't no way to live.

    Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history [as Islam].

    Even if that were true, it’s irrelevant. Islam’s bloody, violent, and intolerant history is ongoing.

    Christian fundamentalist fanatics take their kids out of public school. Muslims fundamentalists decapitate apostates.

  172. @ben tillman

    Steve, care to share your opinion on this? Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?
     
    Actually, it stops well short of what is necessary.

    This is classic art of the deal. Push to ban immigration of all Muslims, settle for banning only certain countries.

  173. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    You have a strange view of what constitutes being “penalized” Am *I* penalized every time you deposit a check in your own account rather than mine? Exercising one’s property rights does not penalize others.

  174. @Stan D Mute
    Again, if we (meaning particularly those of us on the alt-right) were serious about stopping this Moslem jihad, the method is right there in front of us. Simply endorse, publically and loudly, the "social conservatism" of Islam. The American and European elites, episcopalian and Jewish, media and corporate, would flip inside 24 hours.

    "We have studied the dictates of sharia and find them completely in line with our goals of rolling back the homo agenda, the divorce epidemic, the pornography of Hollywood, acceptance of crime, vulgarity of (c)rap 'music' and ..."

    Our actual sincerity in the statement is irrelevant. The leftists would have to either argue that Islam supports gay marriage, porn, crime, etc, or they'd have to oppose the Moslems. The reason we keep losing is that we insist on following the rules of a game the leftists created where there are no rules for them. Of course if we continue to sit back and do nothing (or continue being the puppet of Zionists), eventually the Moslems will solve the leftist problem for us.

    Our actual sincerity in the statement is irrelevant. The leftists would have to either argue that Islam supports gay marriage, porn, crime, etc, or they’d have to oppose the Moslems.

    Islam could support those things for us, but not for themselves. That’s what the Soviets did.

  175. @Auntie Analogue
    "integration takes time, if a group isn’t integrating well then you need to slow down the numbers and if there is already a lot of them then have a moratorium."

    Turks and Berbers and various other Moslems have been in Germany and France since the late 1950's. Have you evidence of their "integration"?

    Wherever on earth they've gone, Moslems have never assimilated into a host country's society. Never.

    you have one line for the carnivores and a softer version for the herbivores

  176. @Bill B.
    "The great threat of islamic terrorism is the expansion of state power and its hardening into authoritarianism..."

    No. Islam really is a threat. The choice presented by the Ummah is a moribund, morose Islamic society circling the drain of ambition in this life or the vicious theocratic full monty.

    Any deviation is, history shows, invariably short-lived absent overpowering externalities.

    To confuse the threat to the reaction is a classic mistake, albeit one partly enabled by the inadequacy of the current terms of political debate.

    Things will become much clearer over the next few years. Muslims are certainly helping to smash contemporary political shibboleths by hardly bothering to disguise their aims.

    I agree over the long run Islam is a threat due to demographics and assibiyah but currently the threat of terrorism as an actual killer is very low. Sacrificing the defining features of our societies to defend against that is crazy.

    Now I am not against banning all muslim immigration that would be great, I am not for abridging the freedom of religion of those who already live here unless we have evidence they are radicalized in which case I think we should write laws that allow us to deport those who view our nation as an enemy state.

    And I am not for the creation of police state.

    • Replies: @Bill B.
    OK. I agree that police states are bad.

    The problem is that with rampant multiculturalism - i.e. with distrust and foreignness bleeding into dislike and predation - a police state will be a solution.

    Progressives, if the rope is played out far enough, especially love to erect police states, of course.

    Unfortunately the police state may ultimately be seen as the soft option to the more likely outcome which will be corrosive and dangerous Balkanisation.

    I would like Paul Gottfried to write more on this now.
  177. @NC
    "I hope he collapses and Ted Cruz takes his segment because while I don’t trust Ted as far as I can throw him either, I think he is slightly less likely to declare a police state and nuke russia. "

    Didn't you watch the last debates? Trump is the only legitimate contender that I trust not to start WW3. Every other Democratic and Republican candidate (except Paul) is openly advancing an insanely belligerent policy of confrontation towards Russia. Conventional wisdom appears to be that NOT goading a nuclear superpower that we have no natural conflicts with is somehow weird and dangerous. But letting in millions of Muslims? Well shucks, that's as American as mom and apple pie.

    The issue is I don’t trust Trumps positions on anything look at the evidence in my post, the saber rattling on the right and left scares the crap out of me. I’d love it if Rand Paul was viable canidate or Jim Webb but if you ask me who is more likely to make a historically dumb blunder in dealing with Russia Trump would the one I would point to.

    • Replies: @Daniel Williams

    I’d love it if Rand Paul was viable canidate ... if you ask me who is more likely to make a historically dumb blunder in dealing with Russia Trump would the one I would point to.
     
    Definitely. Trump's history of making bad deals speaks for itself.

    When it's time to negotiate with a guy like Putin, we need a small-town eyedoctor on our side of the table.
  178. If it does turn out to be Trump v. Clinton, look for the most inaccurately-polled election in history. I vowed to never vote for a Repug again after stealing the 2000 election and Iraq. But if we elect Clinton we’re going to get another massive war in the middle east and no action on income inequality from a warmonger addicted to Wall St. bloodmoney. I’d take four years of an unhinged clown if we can avoid throwing another trillion dollars down the shitter.

    I will have to avoid talking about politics with all my conventionally liberal friends for a while, or straight up lie to them.

  179. Mr Trump is perfectly correct to do this, but of course the Powers-That-Be will take this as the opportunity they have been waiting for to destroy him.

    If you simply read his statement, it becomes clear that there are good enough reasons for this measure. Also, if you remember that he is a negotiator, you will realize that he knows how to demand a lot up front, with the expectation that whatever less comes of it will still be better than what existed before.

    It is unfortunate that the West and Americans have lost so much of their Chutzpah that such a statement throws them into a pussy-fit. This is proof of how far we have fallen.

    Contrary to what people with the megaphone in the MSM will shout to you, there is nothing “unconstitutional” about restricting immigration and visas on specific bases. The Constitution protects the right of people inside our country to worship and speak as they please; it does not guarantee entry to anybody. Frankly, we don’t have to allow anybody in, and we can make any restrictions we want. It is our country, after all. Donald Trump, oddball that he is, is the only candidate free enough to bluntly show us this fact.

  180. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Leftist conservative
    why corpgovmedia hates trump--if he gets in and starts cutting back on mass immigration, the whole growth/debt-based ponzi scheme will take a huge hit like it did in 2008....once too many people opt out and lose faith, the big players will lose billions, even trillions. And the media's business model is already taking a huge hit from the internet, so another big hit on corporate profits will close down a lot of media outlets or at least force them to make big layoffs. Hence the media's constant attacks on trump...


    To keep it all going requires eternal growth...hence corpgovmedia's vicious hatred at anything that threatens mass immigration....and muslim immigration is a big source of growth.

    why corpgovmedia hates trump–if he gets in and starts cutting back on mass immigration, the whole growth/debt-based ponzi scheme will take a huge hit like it did in 2008….To keep it all going requires eternal growth…hence corpgovmedia’s vicious hatred at anything that threatens mass immigration….and muslim immigration is a big source of growth.

    You are right that is what they believe but they’re wrong.

    Mass immigration is deflationary and the *cause* of the slow growth.

    If mass immigration goes down (or reversed) and employment and wages go up then growth will return.

  181. @anon
    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly

    Maybe, but the Jihadi can already pass through effortlessly. What Trump's plan will do is cut down on the number of second- and third-generation immigrants who get radicalized here. Like all the Somalis wanting to join ISIS.

    I'm sorry you don't like it, but it's a good plan.

    plus guerrillas need a jungle to hide in

    ethnic enclaves are their jungle

  182. @Jefferson
    Politically playing nice with Muslims is not going to get the GOP anywhere, it is certainly not going to help them win any elections. Mitt Romney never publicly said anything negative about Muslims like Donald Trump has, yet Mitt Romney still only won a pathetically low 4 percent of the Muslim vote in the 2012 presidential elections, even though he ran as a political moderate and not as a far Right Winger.

    Romney only appeared moderate to GOP base voters, the mainstream believed what the media told them, and had the benefit of Romney’s intemperate remarks.

    “Severe conservative”
    “47 percent”
    Paul Ryan’s Medicare “vouchers”

  183. @Andy
    Generally agree, though perhaps an exception can be made towards people coming from a few Muslim countries without strong jihadist movement (Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Albania, Indonesia)

    Albanians run the slave trade in the EU.

  184. @Discard
    We were assured that the 1965 Immigration Act would not change the racial composition of the country, but somehow, it did. Somebody lied. Your assurances fall on deaf ears.

    Even if we had only 2% Moslems, they'd be a problem. Look at the damage that Jews, about 3% of the population, have done.

    Ethnic cleansing campaigns for American citizens and more senseless, destructive Forever Wars in the Middle East? I can’t say I’m a fan of Trump.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
    "Ethnic cleansing campaigns for American citizens and more senseless, destructive Forever Wars in the Middle East? I can’t say I’m a fan of Trump."

    Clearly you're a fan of outrageous hyperbole, I should think that you would love Trump.
  185. @wolfy
    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.

    Nice & pleasant is more important than IQ. Everyone here would rather live around dumb pleasant people than intelligent vicious people. Vicious low IQ people are bad too.

    To rephrase: Why should nice, pleasant, Muslims be penalized?

    They shouldn’t. Everyone here would rather live among more Ayaan Hirsi Alis and Razib Khans and less Bernie Sanders and Bill DeBlasios.

    Screening between good and bad people is complicated. Something as simple as screening by religion is quite coarse and it will make many mistakes.

    It’s baffling to me to hear citizens of Saudi Arabia criticize Trump as some great evil. They ruthlessly forbid other religions from their country and block members of their very own Arab Sunni Muslim demographic from immigrating. Those are orders of magnitude worse than anything Trump has proposed.

    • Replies: @BurplesonAFB
    Razib Khan and Ayaan Hirsi Ali are both atheists, as far as I know.
  186. @Hail
    Why is the media ignoring Rand Paul's call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, which preceded Trump's by at least six hours?

    Poor Rand. Can never get any attention.

    “Why is the media ignoring Rand Paul’s call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, which preceded Trump’s by at least six hours?”

    Because Donald Trump is going to be the next President of the United States, and Rand Paul isn’t.

  187. @Svigor

    “It would certainly be challenged as unconstitutional,” he said. “And I predict the Supreme Court would strike it down.”
     
    Then, regrettably, we'll have to place a moratorium on all immigration. It's the only way to be fair and protect us from terrorists. Thanks Supreme Court!

    “It would certainly be challenged as unconstitutional,” he said. “And I predict the Supreme Court would strike it down.”

    I tried scrolling back to locate the poster who said that in order to determine what “it” was referring to. I was unable to locate the quote so I am left in dark what he was referring to. However, the legal issue would not arise until and unless Trump became President. (I can’t believe the Supreme Court would rule that prohibition of Muslim immigrants would somehow violate the Constitution since there is nothing in the Constitution that would bar such exclusion, if enacted by Congress. If the SC were to strike down an executive order by Trump, that would call into question a whole long list of similar actions by Obama. However, the issue is moot until Trump becomes President and issues such an order.) In the meantime, he seems to be in sole possession of a very potent political issue. An earlier poster alluded to the likely possibility that there might be another terrorist attack instigated by Muslims in the near future. Like that earlier poster, I am of the opinion that, if such a tragedy were to occur, it might be time to imitate the late Don Meredith on ABC’s original Monday Night Football and start singing “The Party’s Over.” And I’m talking not only about the Republican nomination but the final showdown with Ms. Hillary herself. (Being a lifelong Redskins fan, I hate to say it about a former Dallas Cowboy, but Don Meredith was a truly funny and entertaining guy, a real American character.)

  188. Integration is a function of numbers / time.

    If integration of a particular group isn’t happening fast enough then either decrease the numbers and/or have a moratorium and increase the time.

    Common sense.

  189. @countenance
    Republocrats fume in earnest:

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/262368-gop-dem-rivals-condemn-trumps-muslim-ban-proposal

    Rand Paul actually admitted having a similar moratorium plan.

    Speaking of Muslims…

    A Muslim who protested Brits over Syrian airstrikes with poster saying ‘I am a Muslim… do you trust me enough for a hug?’ now faces jail for threatening to bomb MP’s house .

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3349803/Muslim-convert-faces-jail-threatening-bomb-MP-s-house.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailUK

  190. A good scheme for the government to raise additional revenue: “Tax foreigners living abroad.” That’s a Bennie Hill joke from about forty years ago. “The U.S. Constitution extends its protections to foreigners living abroad.” – that’s the theoretical basis for saying that Trump’s plan to exclude Muslims is unconstitutional. The first joke is still funny, but the second, less so, because it’s been the received legal wisdom for some time now.

  191. @Steve Sailer
    Houellebecq tried it. I'm not sure if Americans are clever enough to get the joke.

    Houellebecq, as I understand it from reviews, presented a guy who went along to get ahead.

    And the other comments in reply missed it entirely. The leftists are simple children. This is why they want Government (daddy) to take care of them. They want Government to protect them from the meanies who would hurt their feelings and want Government (still daddy) to accept them despite their repugnant flaws. Government is Good Daddy or Fantasy Daddy. The political right, especially the “far right” is their Real Daddy. It’s the daddy who punished them when he caught them molesting their sister or fellating the nine year old next door when they were twelve. It’s the daddy who cut their credit card in half after he saw the statement for $1800 spent at American Eagle Outfitters buying new outfits for the boyfriend. The right is the daddy who spanked them, grounded them, etc. The leftist wants to punish that mean bad daddy and have good Government daddy shower them with praise and goodies.

    By appearing to embrace the conservatism of the Moslem, the leftist will be forced to confront a sliver of reality. No matter what, he cannot agree with bad daddy and he championed Moslems only because he thought bad daddy hated them. Now bad daddy is praising the Moslems’ social (and fiscal?) conservatism? Why then of course Moslems are evil! Bad daddy would want to make his slutty daughter get circumcised! Bad daddy would want to chop off the hands of thieves – remember how angry he was when you got caught shoplifting? Bad daddy would want you to wear a hijab – he was adamant that you couldn’t wear lacy lingerie to school..

    Leftists really can’t think more deeply than this. If they could, they’d understand that the Moslems would have them all publically tortured and killed. If the leftist could think logically based on evidence and reason, they’d be conservative. This is why we always fail in attempts to persuade them with logic. Their entire ideology is based on goodies and resentment.

    Also, for what it’s worth, this same reverse psychology would work on their reproductive choices. They refuse to settle down and have children (leading in most cases to becoming responsible) because that’s what bad daddy wants. But if bad daddy were to say, “Thank God you don’t have kids, you’re utterly incapable of having kids, probably infertile and kids would run into traffic to get away from you anyway.” – Well then! I’ll show you bad daddy!

  192. @Steve Sailer
    By the way, who should be Secretary of State and National Security Advisor in a Trump Administration?

    Patrick Buchanan would make an outstanding Secretary of State. I’d love to see Jim Webb as Secretary of Defense. Ted Cruz is a little squirrely for my tastes, but with a little adult supervision, he might just have the talents necessary to make an amazing Attorney General. I’m kinda partial to the idea of Marine ex-General Anthony Zinni as National Security Adviser. There are a lot of interesting possibilities, once you elect a solid President.

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    I like that lineup. I'll bet we'd shed a lot less blood and treasure in sandy soil with that team.
  193. I understand why some people support him – he’s the antithesis to the careful, tip-toeing on eggshells, candidates. But that doesn’t mean he’s suitable. He’s another step to President Camacho of Idiocracy. I’d prefer Sanders.

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson

    I’d prefer Sanders.
     
    Right. Because Socialism has such a great track record. It is wonderfully appealing At least if you want America to do a face-plant.

    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. -- Winston Churchill
     
    , @Hunsdon
    Make your case.
  194. From the looks of it the MSM, the GOP and White House is having a major meltdown over Trump’s comments. It’s absolutely frigging hilarious.

    These cretins are so wound up in PC/MC and globalism that anyone who dares speak the truth makes them burst into flames like some kind of vampire exposed to sun light. They have no response except to label Trump as a “fascist”, “Hitler”(which seems to be the common label applied to PC/MC heretics).

    From the looks of it, they’ve run out of labels to apply to Trump and his supporters. I suspect the next step is for them to openly embrace Islam and Muslims as a show of defiance to Trump.

  195. “Listen, the only way you can be safe is to give up all of your guns and let more Muslims in. Trust me.”
    – Obama Islama

  196. @Daniel Williams

    Opposing radical change in the demographics of your country is one thing but surely this goes wayyy beyond that?
     
    Are you kidding? I see this as just a beginning.

    Watch an episode of Leave It To Beaver and count the number of Muslims that Wally, Beav, and Whitey (!) interact with. That is the goal.

    Watch an episode of Leave It To Beaver and count the number of Muslims that Wally, Beav, and Whitey (!) interact with. That is the goal.

    There actually is an episode of “The Andy Griffith Show” where Islam makes a brief appearance. “Alcohol and Old Lace”; guess what it’s a parody of. Two nice old white ladies make moonshine out of a still, and because they have compunctions about debauching the town, they sell it only to people who claim they’re using it for a holiday. Naturally, this inspires a new wave of multiculturalism as bums, tramps and drunkards scratch out semi-plausible excuses as to why they need some moonshine to bring savor to a special occasion. The most audacious guy claims to be a Muslim celebrating the birth of Muhammad.

    Being nice white ladies, they’re impeccably genial as they usher him off with his moonshine, even returning his Arabian hand gesture and wishing him a “Happy Mohammad’s birthday”. The following dialogue ensues:

    1st White Lady: “I had no idea there were so many Moslems in Mayberry.”
    2nd White Lady: “I could have sworn Lawrence Hansen was a Lutheran. Shows that if it wasn’t for their holidays, you’d never know!”

  197. @Massimo Heitor

    this is a stupid decision. why should high IQ Muslims be penalized.
     
    Nice & pleasant is more important than IQ. Everyone here would rather live around dumb pleasant people than intelligent vicious people. Vicious low IQ people are bad too.

    To rephrase: Why should nice, pleasant, Muslims be penalized?

    They shouldn't. Everyone here would rather live among more Ayaan Hirsi Alis and Razib Khans and less Bernie Sanders and Bill DeBlasios.

    Screening between good and bad people is complicated. Something as simple as screening by religion is quite coarse and it will make many mistakes.

    It's baffling to me to hear citizens of Saudi Arabia criticize Trump as some great evil. They ruthlessly forbid other religions from their country and block members of their very own Arab Sunni Muslim demographic from immigrating. Those are orders of magnitude worse than anything Trump has proposed.

    Razib Khan and Ayaan Hirsi Ali are both atheists, as far as I know.

  198. @Steve Sailer
    Mainstream orthodoxy: Invade the World / Invite the World

    Bizarre extremism: Burkean prudence

    I will vote for a President of the United States of America.

    I will vote for no more World Emperors.

  199. WhatEvvs [AKA "Internet Addict"] says:
    @Luke Lea
    Here is something I didn't know (from Wikipedia):

    The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), based in Plainfield, Indiana, USA, is a Muslim umbrella group. It has been described in the media as the largest Muslim organization in North America.[1][2][3]

    ISNA has often been at the center of harsh criticism for its alleged ties to extremist and terrorist groups in the U.S.

    https://goo.gl/wOB8mX

    France has founded ISIS propaganda and Kalashnikovs in mosque raids. Why now? Why not after Charlie Hebdo? In fact, why not before CH?

    I wonder what we’d find if we raided a bunch of mosques here? Or perhaps such raids go on all the time and we don’t hear about them. That’s my guess.

  200. @Corvinus
    Yojimbo/Zatoichi...

    "No magic necessary. Start by visiting the top 50 mosques in US. Have undercover agents fluent in Arabic/English etc and secretly record various sermons each week. They were radicalized somewhere, and the mosque is usually the center of Islamic daily life. Also, some of the radicals are no strangers to social media (twitter; facebook; etc)."

    What do you think our intelligence apparatus has been doing? And, yet, where are those widespread, spiderweb Muzzie terror cells you seem fascinated about? Millions of our Muslims are not heeding the call of Jihad. I wonder why...

    Auntie Analogue...

    "None of those individuals was a member of a fourteen-centuries-long, uniquely and supremely intolerant “religion” with a history of bloody conquest and genocide that today has 1.6 billion Moslems,"

    Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history.

    "every one of whom subscribes, in varying degrees, to the Koran’s command to Moslems to wage jihad (by any or every one of jihad’s various methods) until the entire earth is under Islamic rule."

    Assuming that EVERY Muslim interprets jihad as war against Christians, either through overt and covert means. That command, however, is no different, that when conservatives, liberals, da Joos, communists, socialists, atheists, etc. desire a world entirely of "their own kind" through the power of the pen, the power of law, or the power of the gun.

    g Pinfold--"ALL immigrants/visitors from suspect countries are suspect, and ALL suspect individuals from above-board countries are suspect too."

    Your logic is suspect. Living in fear of what could happen ain't no way to live.

    “Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history.”

    My dear Corvinus, your own sentence shoots down its own tu quoque [non]-argument: “was” being its operative verb. Today Christian churches’, Jewish groups’ and secular and foreigner-run groups’ “Refugee” Resettlement Racket VOLAG’s rake in multi-millions of taxpayer dollars to Import Moslems and impose them and their costs upon us Americans.

    “Assuming that EVERY Muslim interprets jihad as war against Christians, either through overt and covert means. That command, however, is no different, that when conservatives, liberals, da Joos, communists, socialists, atheists, etc. desire a world entirely of ‘their own kind’ through the power of the pen, the power of law, or the power of the gun.”

    I do not “desire a world entirely of their own kind.” I want not to be forced to pay to Import and not to be forced to pay to support Islam & Moslems, as neither Islam, nor Moslems, have contributed a single positive thing to the United States and have instead been nothing but a drain on taxpayers and a menace in their pursuit of one or more of the forms of jihad.

    Further, I don’t today see “conservatives, liberals, da Joos” desiring a “world entirely of their own kind.” I grant you that’s what communists, socialists and a proportion of atheists do desire and have been caviling to attain. The fact remains that the Koran commands all Moslems to perform one or more of jihad’s forms to attain global Islamic rule: no other religion claims or is based on such a command from its deity. In fact, no other religion but Islam divides the people of the world into “the House of Submission [Islam]” and “the House of War [kuffar].” Right there lies a sound reason not to Import and to deport Moslems, as Islam’s doctrine rejects Western pluralism.

  201. Left this comment at the NY Times, but have my doubts it will be published:

    So what is the big propaganda boost that Trump has supposedly awarded to ISIS?

    Trump would keep Muslims from immigrating to the US because he thinks some of them may be terrorists. So the idea is that a Muslim is going to get angry about that obviously false stereotype, and become a terrorist to show how wrong Trump was?

    What sense does this make? Isn’t any Muslim who might actually get angry about Trump’s suggestion and become a terrorist so completely irrational that he (or she! let’s not forget the ladies!) going to find something to get angry about anyway?

  202. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I see where DailyMail has been on an anti-Trump campaign for awhile now and has kicked into high gear now. It’s a British publication so what’s it to them who the American people might decide to entertain as their candidates? It’s now a bi-partisan wolf pack trying to bring him down. It must be a sign of panic that they’re getting so vicious now. Trump hasn’t really said anything particularly extreme so far; barring further influx of Muslims is just a commonsense idea. We’ve been so conditioned that the center has shifted so far to the left that this seems radical. The country already has 320M people and many are out of work, lots of homeless, people on Food Stamps and standing in food bank lines, etc. Perhaps he could say only those with advanced degrees will be considered for immigration here; that ought to exclude the vast majority right off the bat. Watching the spittle fly is getting entertaining.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    I see where DailyMail has been on an anti-Trump campaign for awhile now and has kicked into high gear now. It’s a British publication so what’s it to them who the American people might decide to entertain as their candidates?
     
    The Mail Online has a US version and an office in New York. It is the 8th most popular news site and has an estimated 53 million unique visitors each month. Since the population of the UK is about 63 million, and not all of those speak English and many are children, it seems likely that quite a few readers must be in other English speaking countries.
  203. @ganderson
    Swedish, Czech and Slovak hockey players, too. Russians we don't need, the NBA players of the NHL.

    The Russians are nothin’! Nothin’!

  204. Listening to NPR radio news on the way home tonight, based on the obloquy they are now heaping on Donald Trump, I got the distinct impression that they and all the other MSM have gone off the rails . The establishment is now so afraid of this man’s rational policy prescriptions that they fail to realize their increasingly shrill, irrational and off-topic attacks are drawing thoughtful voters to him.

    I’m no longer nervous about expressing my support for Trump in places I wouldn’t have dared to a few weeks ago. No one can match my arguments in support of his policy statements and I regularly have persons who have heard me approach surreptitiously to say that although they are afraid to speak out they are grateful for more forthright persons like myself. I am beginning to have a glimmer of hope that a slim majority of the sane electorate in this country and in the UK and Europe are coming to their senses and may yet save themselves from the doom so carelessly crafted by establishments and elites who seem hellbent on destroying western civilization.

  205. So it comes down to:
    Trump vs Hillary
    Guns or Muslims

    decide!

  206. @Svigor
    If I were Trump, I would walk this back to "what I mean is, we shouldn't be importing people from terrorist-heavy cultures. We can still have Muslims from Brunei." And add that if the SC strikes down such a law because discrimination, he'd have no choice but to shut down all immigration, in a totally non-discriminatory way.

    Rule one, Never back down,’
    Double down.

    It’s how the left won.

  207. @Steve Sailer
    Mainstream orthodoxy: Invade the World / Invite the World

    Bizarre extremism: Burkean prudence

    Agreed, the orthodoxy is not prudent or moderate. But there’s a difference between calling for “moratorium on immigration” or even a “moratorium on immigration from majority-Muslim countries” and calling for all Muslims to be denied entry to the United States. That is extreme. The U.S. has never had such a policy toward any religion. And the ambiguity about what Trump means–the possibility that he means even U.S. citizens may not return from a trip abroad–is not a point in its favor. If you don’t have enough of a policy grasp to give even a clue of how this could work in practice, you’re also not that credible. Part of me, maybe all of me, wanted to believe Trump was just the ticket, the unlikely savior, but the shark has definitely been jumped. Cold-eyed realism. But the story doesn’t end there, and Douthat has been good on the potential positive upshots.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Silber
    The U.S. has never had such a policy toward any religion.

    Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?

    Also, just because something has never been done in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't have been done in the past, much less that it should not be done now or ever in the future.
  208. @Vinay
    For one thing, he's not just talking about Muslim immigration, he's talking about *all* Muslim visits. That is so totally crazy it wouldn't even move the Overton window. Rather, it'll probably repel the Overton window in the *other* direction -- like Dylan Roof, who managed to achieve the previously unthinkable, getting South Carolina to abandon the Confederate flag and causing a bunch of other places to ban it.

    Bush managed to set the Sunni Arab world on fire in retaliation for 9/11 while strongly and repeatedly emphasizing religious inclusiveness. Roosevelt deployed a German American to pulverize Germany to rubble. Compare and contrast!

    Vinay,

    You are right, this is over the top. I personally do not support why Trump says on this. That he thinks we could prevent American citizen Muslims overseas from returning for awhile shows just how much he is not a man of details.

    Still, at this point I still think Trump’s presence in the 2016 presidential field has had value. It should have shown both the elite and the rest of us just how fed up and dying for change a lot of us are. It has shown how the status quo isn’t working for most of us and that we want something else.

    I personally don’t want Donald Trump to be president — not at all.

    But if he ends us pushing Americans to open up their eyes and realize that they should be mad as hell and not take things anymore, he’ll have done us a great favor.

    Time will tell if Trump’s big mouth takes him out of this race well before the end of the Republican primary season next year.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    You are right, this is over the top. I personally do not support why Trump says on this. That he thinks we could prevent American citizen Muslims overseas from returning for awhile shows just how much he is not a man of details.
     
    Here is Rush's take on what Trump was doing by his over the top statement.


    They wouldn't be seen reading Trump's book!

    Right in The Art of the Deal Trump says, if you're serious in a negotiation about wanting something -- and, by the way, being serious is the only time to enter into it -- and if there's something dead certain you've gotta have, you have got to start out with the most outrageous position. The opener has got to be so outrageous that the compromise is exactly what you want. The opener is the most outrageous demand that you can make.
     
  209. Time to repeal the McCarran-Walter Act an bring back the Asian Exclusion Zone.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1917

  210. @SEATAF
    Agreed, the orthodoxy is not prudent or moderate. But there's a difference between calling for "moratorium on immigration" or even a "moratorium on immigration from majority-Muslim countries" and calling for all Muslims to be denied entry to the United States. That is extreme. The U.S. has never had such a policy toward any religion. And the ambiguity about what Trump means--the possibility that he means even U.S. citizens may not return from a trip abroad--is not a point in its favor. If you don't have enough of a policy grasp to give even a clue of how this could work in practice, you're also not that credible. Part of me, maybe all of me, wanted to believe Trump was just the ticket, the unlikely savior, but the shark has definitely been jumped. Cold-eyed realism. But the story doesn't end there, and Douthat has been good on the potential positive upshots.

    The U.S. has never had such a policy toward any religion.

    Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?

    Also, just because something has never been done in the past doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have been done in the past, much less that it should not be done now or ever in the future.

    • Replies: @SEATAF
    "Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?"

    Has any religion done so at all? Islam has not, despite its wing of crazies. As for unofficial wars on western civilization, those are nothing new. All sorts of ideologies have prosecuted such wars, often with tragic success.

    "Also, just because something has never been done in the past doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have been done in the past, much less that it should not be done now or ever in the future."

    Very true, but that wasn't the point. The point was to underscore how extreme such a policy would be.
    , @iSteveFan

    Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?
     
    Certainly Islamic civilization has been at war with Western civilization since its founding. And for much of that time has in fact held the upper hand in some places.
  211. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Shiite!!!! ROTFL.

    https://www.facebook.com/socialjusticewarriors/videos/1014006865332819/

    Obama praised ‘Caitlyn Jenner’ for his courage.

    Will Obama also praise this trans-gender AND trans-age person?

    Gee, aren’t we more ‘evolved’ for celebrating such thing.

    Encourage one idiocy and it leads to another and then another and then another.

    And no one better laugh lest it be transagephobic.

  212. Can we compromise and just ban Saudi subjects from the U.S.?

  213. @anonymous
    I see where DailyMail has been on an anti-Trump campaign for awhile now and has kicked into high gear now. It's a British publication so what's it to them who the American people might decide to entertain as their candidates? It's now a bi-partisan wolf pack trying to bring him down. It must be a sign of panic that they're getting so vicious now. Trump hasn't really said anything particularly extreme so far; barring further influx of Muslims is just a commonsense idea. We've been so conditioned that the center has shifted so far to the left that this seems radical. The country already has 320M people and many are out of work, lots of homeless, people on Food Stamps and standing in food bank lines, etc. Perhaps he could say only those with advanced degrees will be considered for immigration here; that ought to exclude the vast majority right off the bat. Watching the spittle fly is getting entertaining.

    I see where DailyMail has been on an anti-Trump campaign for awhile now and has kicked into high gear now. It’s a British publication so what’s it to them who the American people might decide to entertain as their candidates?

    The Mail Online has a US version and an office in New York. It is the 8th most popular news site and has an estimated 53 million unique visitors each month. Since the population of the UK is about 63 million, and not all of those speak English and many are children, it seems likely that quite a few readers must be in other English speaking countries.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    The Mail Online has a US version and an office in New York. It is the 8th most popular news site and has an estimated 53 million unique visitors each month. Since the population of the UK is about 63 million, and not all of those speak English and many are children, it seems likely that quite a few readers must be in other English speaking countries.
     
    Frequently, the Mail takes the lead in reporting on crimes in the US that are contrary to the Narrative. I would estimate that I visit their web site 15-20 times per year for such stories.
  214. @epebble
    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly while plenty of innocent people will be harassed needlessly (I am talking about simple visitors, immigration is a different topic). In fact, if a Jihadi wants to come and blow up a big building, he will probably "become" a christian, read a little "Christianity For Dummies" (sadly, a used copy commands all of one cent! http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-For-Dummies-Richard-Wagner/dp/0764544829 )

    You really don’t understand, do you?

    Sure, there will be another Jihadi that gets through. That the atrocity committed will increase the pressure to take even stronger measures against the Muslim community seems to be lost on you. Maybe another atrocity after its most recent predecessor will be committed. If you do not know that once enough Jihadi murderers succeed, measures will go beyond immigration. It will get ugly. And if you are a Muslim you will be caught up in the maelstrom.

    If you had a little more situational awareness you would understand the peril. Like all structural and design problems, it is better to solve the problem earlier rather than later.

    But make no mistake, the problem will be solved.

  215. @Vinay
    Even *Israel* wouldn't implement such a policy. And all for what? Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade? Initially, Homeland Security was ridiculed for refusing to profile by ethnicity but they were repeatedly proven right.

    After 9/11, America showed that it can afford to speak softly because it carries a very big stick. Even ignoring the wars and extraordinary renditions, there was also the endless parade of hapless jihadi wanna-be incompetents baited by FBI operatives into trying to carry out their fantastical plots.

    Compared to 9/11, San Bernardino was a pretty brainless plot -- shoot your co-workers! And now we have an equally brainless response.

    Initially, Homeland Security was ridiculed for refusing to profile by ethnicity but they were repeatedly proven right.

    Really?

    Singling out the wheelchair-bound elderly for enhanced scrutiny proves them right? Delusional is the most charitable description I can think of for you. But your argument would not pass muster in middle-school debate club.

    That profiling is not 100% effective is not an argument against it use. If it was we should abolish the FDA immediately. USDA meat inspection? Why would we do that? It isn’t perfect, so let’s randomly select everything from boxed cereal to cans of soda pop for Escherichia Coli. That’ll keep people from getting food poisoning!

    And your advocacy for randomly selecting passengers, regardless of attributes, for needless friction isn’t just ineffective, it is counter-productive.

    Maybe you are not just another liberal idiot trolling for the latest chance to exhibit your stupidity. But if you are a person of good will trying to protect the innocent, the stop ‘helping’.

  216. @Daniel Williams

    Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade?
     
    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don't try to also catch meningitis.

    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don’t try to also catch meningitis.

    • Replies: @Hail
    What is the trick to posting Youtube videos, images, and Tweets? Some are able to do it, but I have not been able to.
  217. @Daniel Williams

    Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade?
     
    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don't try to also catch meningitis.

    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don’t try to also catch meningitis.

  218. @AshTon
    I understand why some people support him - he's the antithesis to the careful, tip-toeing on eggshells, candidates. But that doesn't mean he's suitable. He's another step to President Camacho of Idiocracy. I'd prefer Sanders.

    I’d prefer Sanders.

    Right. Because Socialism has such a great track record. It is wonderfully appealing At least if you want America to do a face-plant.

    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. — Winston Churchill

  219. In my view, singling out “Muslim immigration” was an own goal that let everyone bleat at him and make the story about Islamophobia. He should have just called for a moratorium on all immigration for now (and gotten the phrase “immigration moratorium” into the public consciousness). Things like this show what an amateurish operation Trump 2016 still is.

    • Replies: @Daniel Williams

    Things like this show what an amateurish operation Trump 2016 still is.
     
    When are you people going to stop saying this kind of thing? Will Trump have to poll 50% before you concede that a.) he knows what he's doing, and b.) he's doing it really, really well? 75%? 100%?
    , @Hunsdon
    Thomas: Two possible takes on your allegation that Trump is amateurish. First, etymological. Yes, he's an amateur---he's doing it for love, vice being a professional politician! (What, like he needs the salary?) Second, I've been hearing predictions of the Great Trump Flame-Out since about five minutes after he announced. I love reading "Salon" headlines about his Evil Male Stale Pale Whiteness. Maybe it'll happen. I'm no prognosticator. But bear in mind: the professionals are all cool with us being allied with Al-Qaeda (or at least it's much nicer, much less radical younger brother the al-Nusra Front) against a secular, multiconfessional state headed by Bashar al-Assad.
  220. @Jonathan Silber
    The U.S. has never had such a policy toward any religion.

    Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?

    Also, just because something has never been done in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't have been done in the past, much less that it should not be done now or ever in the future.

    “Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?”

    Has any religion done so at all? Islam has not, despite its wing of crazies. As for unofficial wars on western civilization, those are nothing new. All sorts of ideologies have prosecuted such wars, often with tragic success.

    “Also, just because something has never been done in the past doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have been done in the past, much less that it should not be done now or ever in the future.”

    Very true, but that wasn’t the point. The point was to underscore how extreme such a policy would be.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Has any religion done so at all? Islam has not, despite its wing of crazies."

    Mosquitos, termites, and roaches have not declared war on us either. None-the-less, we prosecute war against them.

  221. @Jonathan Silber
    The U.S. has never had such a policy toward any religion.

    Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?

    Also, just because something has never been done in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't have been done in the past, much less that it should not be done now or ever in the future.

    Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?

    Certainly Islamic civilization has been at war with Western civilization since its founding. And for much of that time has in fact held the upper hand in some places.

  222. iSteveFan says:
    @notsaying
    Vinay,

    You are right, this is over the top. I personally do not support why Trump says on this. That he thinks we could prevent American citizen Muslims overseas from returning for awhile shows just how much he is not a man of details.

    Still, at this point I still think Trump's presence in the 2016 presidential field has had value. It should have shown both the elite and the rest of us just how fed up and dying for change a lot of us are. It has shown how the status quo isn't working for most of us and that we want something else.

    I personally don't want Donald Trump to be president -- not at all.

    But if he ends us pushing Americans to open up their eyes and realize that they should be mad as hell and not take things anymore, he'll have done us a great favor.

    Time will tell if Trump's big mouth takes him out of this race well before the end of the Republican primary season next year.

    You are right, this is over the top. I personally do not support why Trump says on this. That he thinks we could prevent American citizen Muslims overseas from returning for awhile shows just how much he is not a man of details.

    Here is Rush’s take on what Trump was doing by his over the top statement.

    They wouldn’t be seen reading Trump’s book!

    Right in The Art of the Deal Trump says, if you’re serious in a negotiation about wanting something — and, by the way, being serious is the only time to enter into it — and if there’s something dead certain you’ve gotta have, you have got to start out with the most outrageous position. The opener has got to be so outrageous that the compromise is exactly what you want. The opener is the most outrageous demand that you can make.

    • Replies: @notsaying
    Thanks for sharing that quote. It sure explains this.

    Certainly what Trump said should qualify for "the most outrageous demand that you can make." I have to wonder though if Trump realizes that in the political realm you cannot be as outrageous as you can in business.
    , @a Newsreader
    The mainstream's refusal to learn from Trump's book mirrors its refusal to learn from Obama's.
  223. @Fenris
    The issue is I don't trust Trumps positions on anything look at the evidence in my post, the saber rattling on the right and left scares the crap out of me. I'd love it if Rand Paul was viable canidate or Jim Webb but if you ask me who is more likely to make a historically dumb blunder in dealing with Russia Trump would the one I would point to.

    I’d love it if Rand Paul was viable canidate … if you ask me who is more likely to make a historically dumb blunder in dealing with Russia Trump would the one I would point to.

    Definitely. Trump’s history of making bad deals speaks for itself.

    When it’s time to negotiate with a guy like Putin, we need a small-town eyedoctor on our side of the table.

  224. @Wilkey
    I'm not exactly immune to the fear that people might think me an extremist or racist (I am using a pseudonym, after all) but if I had more faith in Trump I'd be perfectly willing to come right out and say it. I have serious doubts about him, though. I'm glad he's widening the range of acceptable political positions. I find it hard to believe he's all that sincere. But if he is the Republican nominee I'll support him proudly and openly.

    Thing is, what’s different this time, Trump is funding his own campaign.

    I saw a video from 1988 that Trump has been thinking of the Presidency even back then.

    What if this guy is so smart that he knew way back when that, in order to self-fund his campaign so he’s not beholden to The Donor Class who are ruining our country, that he knew he’d have to have a hit reality-TV show for the free name recognition and ratings-garnering in order to be able to get his TV time free for his campaign, before ever announcing?

    Maybe he is sincere. What if he’s so smart and so genuinely desirous of being heralded as the Great Man who Made America Great Again, that he’s spent the last ten years creating a hit reality TV show just SO he can get elected without selling his soul to the Donor Class? What if?

    What if he really *is* what he says he is? What if he really *wants to do* what he says he does? What if?

  225. @Thomas
    In my view, singling out "Muslim immigration" was an own goal that let everyone bleat at him and make the story about Islamophobia. He should have just called for a moratorium on all immigration for now (and gotten the phrase "immigration moratorium" into the public consciousness). Things like this show what an amateurish operation Trump 2016 still is.

    Things like this show what an amateurish operation Trump 2016 still is.

    When are you people going to stop saying this kind of thing? Will Trump have to poll 50% before you concede that a.) he knows what he’s doing, and b.) he’s doing it really, really well? 75%? 100%?

  226. @Corvinus
    Yojimbo/Zatoichi...

    "No magic necessary. Start by visiting the top 50 mosques in US. Have undercover agents fluent in Arabic/English etc and secretly record various sermons each week. They were radicalized somewhere, and the mosque is usually the center of Islamic daily life. Also, some of the radicals are no strangers to social media (twitter; facebook; etc)."

    What do you think our intelligence apparatus has been doing? And, yet, where are those widespread, spiderweb Muzzie terror cells you seem fascinated about? Millions of our Muslims are not heeding the call of Jihad. I wonder why...

    Auntie Analogue...

    "None of those individuals was a member of a fourteen-centuries-long, uniquely and supremely intolerant “religion” with a history of bloody conquest and genocide that today has 1.6 billion Moslems,"

    Christianity was equally a bloody, violent, and intolerant history.

    "every one of whom subscribes, in varying degrees, to the Koran’s command to Moslems to wage jihad (by any or every one of jihad’s various methods) until the entire earth is under Islamic rule."

    Assuming that EVERY Muslim interprets jihad as war against Christians, either through overt and covert means. That command, however, is no different, that when conservatives, liberals, da Joos, communists, socialists, atheists, etc. desire a world entirely of "their own kind" through the power of the pen, the power of law, or the power of the gun.

    g Pinfold--"ALL immigrants/visitors from suspect countries are suspect, and ALL suspect individuals from above-board countries are suspect too."

    Your logic is suspect. Living in fear of what could happen ain't no way to live.

    Millions of our Muslims are not heeding the call of Jihad. I wonder why…

    Because they’re apostates.

  227. @Fun
    Ethnic cleansing campaigns for American citizens and more senseless, destructive Forever Wars in the Middle East? I can't say I'm a fan of Trump.

    “Ethnic cleansing campaigns for American citizens and more senseless, destructive Forever Wars in the Middle East? I can’t say I’m a fan of Trump.”

    Clearly you’re a fan of outrageous hyperbole, I should think that you would love Trump.

  228. @anon
    My trivially simple example was to show that a Jihadi with criminal intent will pass through effortlessly

    Maybe, but the Jihadi can already pass through effortlessly. What Trump's plan will do is cut down on the number of second- and third-generation immigrants who get radicalized here. Like all the Somalis wanting to join ISIS.

    I'm sorry you don't like it, but it's a good plan.

    I am not against the idea; I am just questioning how you will prevent Mohammed Ahmed coming over to Chicago on a U.K. Passport as a 90 day visitor to try to blow up Sears tower using a fertilizer truck. What filter will Homeland security use at JFK to declare him inadmissible and send him back to London? Mohammed works as a chemical engineer in U.K. for Bayer Ltd.

    The only “test” Krauthammer mentioned ( in jest ) was asking him to eat a ham sandwich. Do you have a better test?

    • Replies: @anon
    You're just asking me the same question you already asked me.

    In your example, nothing would stop him from doing that, but nothing would stop him from doing that now. I never said Trump's solution was perfect, but it is better than doing nothing, and it does reduce the problem of second- and third-generation Muslims becoming radicalized, because there will be fewer of them here.

    Do you really not get this, or are you just being deliberately obtuse?
  229. @Jonathan Mason

    I see where DailyMail has been on an anti-Trump campaign for awhile now and has kicked into high gear now. It’s a British publication so what’s it to them who the American people might decide to entertain as their candidates?
     
    The Mail Online has a US version and an office in New York. It is the 8th most popular news site and has an estimated 53 million unique visitors each month. Since the population of the UK is about 63 million, and not all of those speak English and many are children, it seems likely that quite a few readers must be in other English speaking countries.

    The Mail Online has a US version and an office in New York. It is the 8th most popular news site and has an estimated 53 million unique visitors each month. Since the population of the UK is about 63 million, and not all of those speak English and many are children, it seems likely that quite a few readers must be in other English speaking countries.

    Frequently, the Mail takes the lead in reporting on crimes in the US that are contrary to the Narrative. I would estimate that I visit their web site 15-20 times per year for such stories.

  230. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @epebble
    I am not against the idea; I am just questioning how you will prevent Mohammed Ahmed coming over to Chicago on a U.K. Passport as a 90 day visitor to try to blow up Sears tower using a fertilizer truck. What filter will Homeland security use at JFK to declare him inadmissible and send him back to London? Mohammed works as a chemical engineer in U.K. for Bayer Ltd.

    The only "test" Krauthammer mentioned ( in jest ) was asking him to eat a ham sandwich. Do you have a better test?

    You’re just asking me the same question you already asked me.

    In your example, nothing would stop him from doing that, but nothing would stop him from doing that now. I never said Trump’s solution was perfect, but it is better than doing nothing, and it does reduce the problem of second- and third-generation Muslims becoming radicalized, because there will be fewer of them here.

    Do you really not get this, or are you just being deliberately obtuse?

  231. @Kevin O'Keeffe
    Patrick Buchanan would make an outstanding Secretary of State. I'd love to see Jim Webb as Secretary of Defense. Ted Cruz is a little squirrely for my tastes, but with a little adult supervision, he might just have the talents necessary to make an amazing Attorney General. I'm kinda partial to the idea of Marine ex-General Anthony Zinni as National Security Adviser. There are a lot of interesting possibilities, once you elect a solid President.

    I like that lineup. I’ll bet we’d shed a lot less blood and treasure in sandy soil with that team.

  232. @AshTon
    I understand why some people support him - he's the antithesis to the careful, tip-toeing on eggshells, candidates. But that doesn't mean he's suitable. He's another step to President Camacho of Idiocracy. I'd prefer Sanders.

    Make your case.

  233. @Thomas
    In my view, singling out "Muslim immigration" was an own goal that let everyone bleat at him and make the story about Islamophobia. He should have just called for a moratorium on all immigration for now (and gotten the phrase "immigration moratorium" into the public consciousness). Things like this show what an amateurish operation Trump 2016 still is.

    Thomas: Two possible takes on your allegation that Trump is amateurish. First, etymological. Yes, he’s an amateur—he’s doing it for love, vice being a professional politician! (What, like he needs the salary?) Second, I’ve been hearing predictions of the Great Trump Flame-Out since about five minutes after he announced. I love reading “Salon” headlines about his Evil Male Stale Pale Whiteness. Maybe it’ll happen. I’m no prognosticator. But bear in mind: the professionals are all cool with us being allied with Al-Qaeda (or at least it’s much nicer, much less radical younger brother the al-Nusra Front) against a secular, multiconfessional state headed by Bashar al-Assad.

  234. @Steve Sailer
    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don’t try to also catch meningitis.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI0euMFAWF8

    What is the trick to posting Youtube videos, images, and Tweets? Some are able to do it, but I have not been able to.

  235. Auntie Analogue…

    “My dear Corvinus, your own sentence shoots down its own tu quoque [non]-argument: “was” being its operative verb.”

    You ought to follow the events in the Central African Republic before you mouth off regarding Christianity was violent.

    “Today Christian churches’, Jewish groups’ and secular and foreigner-run groups’ “Refugee” Resettlement Racket VOLAG’s rake in multi-millions of taxpayer dollars to Import Moslems and impose them and their costs upon us Americans.”

    Unless, of course, those same groups bring in more desirable refugees, say like Christians. Then your tax dollars are “at work”. You do realize that there a number of programs that taxpayers do not support. Furthermore, these groups have the liberty to honor God’s calling and assist their fellow human beings.

    “as neither Islam, nor Moslems, have contributed a single positive thing to the United States and have instead been nothing but a drain on taxpayers and a menace in their pursuit of one or more of the forms of jihad.”



    When you talk in absolutes, few people are going to take you seriously. Not a single positive thing? Really? Moreover, I’m sure you are able to point out numerous daily instances in which Muslims publicly demonstrate their jihad.

    “Further, I don’t today see “conservatives, liberals, da Joos” desiring a “world entirely of their own kind.”

    Do you even pay attention to some of the fine posters here and their insistence that da Joos are to blame for this and the darkies are to blame for that, and if they only would not be around anymore what a wonderful world it would be?

    “The fact remains that the Koran commands all Moslems to perform one or more of jihad’s forms to attain global Islamic rule: no other religion claims or is based on such a command from its deity.”

    Jihad is derived from the verb Jahada – meaning to strive or struggle for a noble cause. According to Islamic teachings, there are three main types of Jihad which seeks to establish and promote peace in society.

    Do you want to know more, citizen?

    
Daniel Williams…

    “Even if that were true, it’s irrelevant. Islam’s bloody, violent, and intolerant history is ongoing.”

    As is Christianity. What, you think because some Christians don’t blow themselves that they are waging war against any and all “heresies”?

    “Christian fundamentalist fanatics take their kids out of public school.”

    And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?

    Reg Caesar…

    “Because they’re apostates.”

    
Or Muslims are simply practicing their faith differently, just like Christians or Jews who are (gasp) looked down upon by “true believers”.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Do you even pay attention to some of the fine posters here and their insistence that da Joos are to blame for this and the darkies are to blame for that, and if they only would not be around anymore what a wonderful world it would be?"

    A misstatement amounting to a lie. But lies and dissembling are all we ever get from you.

    We don't want the whole world to ourselves. But we do want a few nations to ourselves. And what is wrong with that?
    , @Mr. Anon
    "And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?"

    Yeah, right. Because a day hardly goes by when a pentacostalist doesn't decapitate someone.

    Are you and congenital idiot or a congenital liar?
  236. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Trump has killer instincts and is instinctively feeling out the optimal line to take – everything he says will bump him in the polls.

    Where that leads who knows but all these comments about mistakes and going too far are wrong.

    Millions of our Muslims are not heeding the call of Jihad. I wonder why…

    Numbers. If the percentage was the same as France it would be as bad as France is about to get.

  237. What is the trick to posting Youtube videos, images, and Tweets? Some are able to do it, but I have not been able to.

    When I do it on the PC at the library, it’s easy and automatic. When I do the same on my mobile, it’s impossible.

  238. @Fenris
    I agree over the long run Islam is a threat due to demographics and assibiyah but currently the threat of terrorism as an actual killer is very low. Sacrificing the defining features of our societies to defend against that is crazy.

    Now I am not against banning all muslim immigration that would be great, I am not for abridging the freedom of religion of those who already live here unless we have evidence they are radicalized in which case I think we should write laws that allow us to deport those who view our nation as an enemy state.

    And I am not for the creation of police state.

    OK. I agree that police states are bad.

    The problem is that with rampant multiculturalism – i.e. with distrust and foreignness bleeding into dislike and predation – a police state will be a solution.

    Progressives, if the rope is played out far enough, especially love to erect police states, of course.

    Unfortunately the police state may ultimately be seen as the soft option to the more likely outcome which will be corrosive and dangerous Balkanisation.

    I would like Paul Gottfried to write more on this now.

  239. @epebble
    How would one implement it? If you have a visa application where there is a field for religion, someone who wants to come will write christian. Then what? You have to argue that Mohammed Ahmed is not a christian name? Mohammed will bring a freshly minted baptism certificate from a local Baptism-for-a-Dinar church, located on Jordan river, no less! The best he can do is stop entry to those from specific countries. But that will be diplomatic nightmare. Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate. That will totally mess up our "foreign policy" types.

    “But that will be diplomatic nightmare. Put 60+ countries on no entry list? First thing would be, they would reciprocate.”

    So?

    “That will totally mess up our “foreign policy” types.”

    Good – an added benefit. One of the best things the US could do for itw own citizens would be to close a bunch of our consulates and embassies around the world. If we didn’t have consular officials there, they couldn’t be issuing visas to people from those countries.

  240. @Corvinus
    Auntie Analogue…

    “My dear Corvinus, your own sentence shoots down its own tu quoque [non]-argument: “was” being its operative verb.”

    You ought to follow the events in the Central African Republic before you mouth off regarding Christianity was violent.

    “Today Christian churches’, Jewish groups’ and secular and foreigner-run groups’ “Refugee” Resettlement Racket VOLAG’s rake in multi-millions of taxpayer dollars to Import Moslems and impose them and their costs upon us Americans.”

    Unless, of course, those same groups bring in more desirable refugees, say like Christians. Then your tax dollars are “at work”. You do realize that there a number of programs that taxpayers do not support. Furthermore, these groups have the liberty to honor God’s calling and assist their fellow human beings.

    “as neither Islam, nor Moslems, have contributed a single positive thing to the United States and have instead been nothing but a drain on taxpayers and a menace in their pursuit of one or more of the forms of jihad.”



    When you talk in absolutes, few people are going to take you seriously. Not a single positive thing? Really? Moreover, I’m sure you are able to point out numerous daily instances in which Muslims publicly demonstrate their jihad.

    “Further, I don’t today see “conservatives, liberals, da Joos” desiring a “world entirely of their own kind.”

    Do you even pay attention to some of the fine posters here and their insistence that da Joos are to blame for this and the darkies are to blame for that, and if they only would not be around anymore what a wonderful world it would be?

    “The fact remains that the Koran commands all Moslems to perform one or more of jihad’s forms to attain global Islamic rule: no other religion claims or is based on such a command from its deity.”

    Jihad is derived from the verb Jahada - meaning to strive or struggle for a noble cause. According to Islamic teachings, there are three main types of Jihad which seeks to establish and promote peace in society.

    Do you want to know more, citizen?

    
Daniel Williams…

    “Even if that were true, it’s irrelevant. Islam’s bloody, violent, and intolerant history is ongoing.”

    As is Christianity. What, you think because some Christians don’t blow themselves that they are waging war against any and all “heresies”?

    “Christian fundamentalist fanatics take their kids out of public school.”

    And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?

    Reg Caesar…

    “Because they’re apostates.”

    
Or Muslims are simply practicing their faith differently, just like Christians or Jews who are (gasp) looked down upon by “true believers”.

    “Do you even pay attention to some of the fine posters here and their insistence that da Joos are to blame for this and the darkies are to blame for that, and if they only would not be around anymore what a wonderful world it would be?”

    A misstatement amounting to a lie. But lies and dissembling are all we ever get from you.

    We don’t want the whole world to ourselves. But we do want a few nations to ourselves. And what is wrong with that?

    • Agree: ben tillman
  241. @SEATAF
    "Has any religion, before now, declared and prosecuted a war against the U.S. and our Western Civilization?"

    Has any religion done so at all? Islam has not, despite its wing of crazies. As for unofficial wars on western civilization, those are nothing new. All sorts of ideologies have prosecuted such wars, often with tragic success.

    "Also, just because something has never been done in the past doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have been done in the past, much less that it should not be done now or ever in the future."

    Very true, but that wasn't the point. The point was to underscore how extreme such a policy would be.

    “Has any religion done so at all? Islam has not, despite its wing of crazies.”

    Mosquitos, termites, and roaches have not declared war on us either. None-the-less, we prosecute war against them.

  242. @andy
    Admit as visitors, not as migrants

    “Admit as visitors, not as migrants.”

    Why should we admit them as visitors? We don’t need them. Do you let anyone into your house who might want to come in?

  243. @Daniel Williams

    Has everyone forgotten the string of white/Hispanic/black would-be shoe-bombers and other loonie types over the last decade?
     
    If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don't try to also catch meningitis.

    “If we have a problem with terrorism-prone natives in this country, why would we import terrorism-prone foreigners? When I get the flu, I don’t try to also catch meningitis.”

    Quite right. That argument has always puzzled me. Yes, we already have our own murderers, rapists, conmen, thieves, and drunk-drivers. So why should we want to import still more?

  244. @Corvinus
    Auntie Analogue…

    “My dear Corvinus, your own sentence shoots down its own tu quoque [non]-argument: “was” being its operative verb.”

    You ought to follow the events in the Central African Republic before you mouth off regarding Christianity was violent.

    “Today Christian churches’, Jewish groups’ and secular and foreigner-run groups’ “Refugee” Resettlement Racket VOLAG’s rake in multi-millions of taxpayer dollars to Import Moslems and impose them and their costs upon us Americans.”

    Unless, of course, those same groups bring in more desirable refugees, say like Christians. Then your tax dollars are “at work”. You do realize that there a number of programs that taxpayers do not support. Furthermore, these groups have the liberty to honor God’s calling and assist their fellow human beings.

    “as neither Islam, nor Moslems, have contributed a single positive thing to the United States and have instead been nothing but a drain on taxpayers and a menace in their pursuit of one or more of the forms of jihad.”



    When you talk in absolutes, few people are going to take you seriously. Not a single positive thing? Really? Moreover, I’m sure you are able to point out numerous daily instances in which Muslims publicly demonstrate their jihad.

    “Further, I don’t today see “conservatives, liberals, da Joos” desiring a “world entirely of their own kind.”

    Do you even pay attention to some of the fine posters here and their insistence that da Joos are to blame for this and the darkies are to blame for that, and if they only would not be around anymore what a wonderful world it would be?

    “The fact remains that the Koran commands all Moslems to perform one or more of jihad’s forms to attain global Islamic rule: no other religion claims or is based on such a command from its deity.”

    Jihad is derived from the verb Jahada - meaning to strive or struggle for a noble cause. According to Islamic teachings, there are three main types of Jihad which seeks to establish and promote peace in society.

    Do you want to know more, citizen?

    
Daniel Williams…

    “Even if that were true, it’s irrelevant. Islam’s bloody, violent, and intolerant history is ongoing.”

    As is Christianity. What, you think because some Christians don’t blow themselves that they are waging war against any and all “heresies”?

    “Christian fundamentalist fanatics take their kids out of public school.”

    And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?

    Reg Caesar…

    “Because they’re apostates.”

    
Or Muslims are simply practicing their faith differently, just like Christians or Jews who are (gasp) looked down upon by “true believers”.

    “And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?”

    Yeah, right. Because a day hardly goes by when a pentacostalist doesn’t decapitate someone.

    Are you and congenital idiot or a congenital liar?

    • Replies: @anon
    Probably both. I really like Corvinus's last comment, though.

    "What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?”"

    Yes. Yes I do. Doesn't everyone think that not chopping people's heads off is more civilized than chopping people's heads off?

    Why would someone write something like that? If it's an attempt at a "gotcha", it's one of the worst I've ever seen.
  245. Whatever happened to the celeb killers? Warhol nearly got killed too.

  246. Trump is a Berlusconi-type figure – he will superficially take whatever populist position he deems necessary for power, and then use that to increase his own empire. He is still for endless wars and endless genuflection towards Israel.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    But Berlusconi did make a deal with Gadaffi to shut off the Camp of the Saints coming across the Mediterranean.
  247. @AshTon
    Trump is a Berlusconi-type figure - he will superficially take whatever populist position he deems necessary for power, and then use that to increase his own empire. He is still for endless wars and endless genuflection towards Israel.

    But Berlusconi did make a deal with Gadaffi to shut off the Camp of the Saints coming across the Mediterranean.

    • Replies: @AshTon
    He also destroyed the economy because he was obsessed with his own enrichment. During his rule, only Haiti and Zimbabwe had worse economic growth.

    Berlusconi and Trump are pretty much identical.
  248. @Steve Sailer
    But Berlusconi did make a deal with Gadaffi to shut off the Camp of the Saints coming across the Mediterranean.

    He also destroyed the economy because he was obsessed with his own enrichment. During his rule, only Haiti and Zimbabwe had worse economic growth.

    Berlusconi and Trump are pretty much identical.

    • Replies: @anon
    Italian economic data don't include all the under the counter stuff.
  249. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?"

    Yeah, right. Because a day hardly goes by when a pentacostalist doesn't decapitate someone.

    Are you and congenital idiot or a congenital liar?

    Probably both. I really like Corvinus’s last comment, though.

    “What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?””

    Yes. Yes I do. Doesn’t everyone think that not chopping people’s heads off is more civilized than chopping people’s heads off?

    Why would someone write something like that? If it’s an attempt at a “gotcha”, it’s one of the worst I’ve ever seen.

  250. The223 rifle, designed after the M1 Garand, is mild,
    easy to wield, and pretty correct out to 300 yards.

  251. @AshTon
    He also destroyed the economy because he was obsessed with his own enrichment. During his rule, only Haiti and Zimbabwe had worse economic growth.

    Berlusconi and Trump are pretty much identical.

    Italian economic data don’t include all the under the counter stuff.

  252. @iSteveFan

    You are right, this is over the top. I personally do not support why Trump says on this. That he thinks we could prevent American citizen Muslims overseas from returning for awhile shows just how much he is not a man of details.
     
    Here is Rush's take on what Trump was doing by his over the top statement.


    They wouldn't be seen reading Trump's book!

    Right in The Art of the Deal Trump says, if you're serious in a negotiation about wanting something -- and, by the way, being serious is the only time to enter into it -- and if there's something dead certain you've gotta have, you have got to start out with the most outrageous position. The opener has got to be so outrageous that the compromise is exactly what you want. The opener is the most outrageous demand that you can make.
     

    Thanks for sharing that quote. It sure explains this.

    Certainly what Trump said should qualify for “the most outrageous demand that you can make.” I have to wonder though if Trump realizes that in the political realm you cannot be as outrageous as you can in business.

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    Why not?

    Just because those who do not control the media in America do not like Anglo-Saxon sensibilities does not make them outrageous.
  253. Q: What was the most impressive achievement to date by Muslim immigrants to the United States?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    A Middle Eastern minority built the Bahai Temple in Wilmette, IL.
  254. @Honorary Thief
    Q: What was the most impressive achievement to date by Muslim immigrants to the United States?

    A Middle Eastern minority built the Bahai Temple in Wilmette, IL.

    • Replies: @Honorary Thief
    I had a different feat of ingenuity in mind...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
  255. @Steve Sailer
    A Middle Eastern minority built the Bahai Temple in Wilmette, IL.

    I had a different feat of ingenuity in mind…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

  256. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @notsaying
    Thanks for sharing that quote. It sure explains this.

    Certainly what Trump said should qualify for "the most outrageous demand that you can make." I have to wonder though if Trump realizes that in the political realm you cannot be as outrageous as you can in business.

    Why not?

    Just because those who do not control the media in America do not like Anglo-Saxon sensibilities does not make them outrageous.

  257. Mr. Anon—“A misstatement amounting to a lie. But lies and dissembling are all we ever get from you.”

    There is no misinterpretation on my account. You partake in this blog, you know exactly who are the posters that have their particular fetishes.

    Mr. Anon—“But we do want a few nations to ourselves. And what is wrong with that?”

    First, who is “we”? Second, are not “whites”, however you define them, able to make their own decisions regarding “non-whites” and their level of involvement or participation in American society? OR, must all “whites” be in lock-step with this vision that America is only for “them”?

    Mr. Anon—“Yes, we already have our own murderers, rapists, conmen, thieves, and drunk-drivers. So why should we want to import still more?”

    Assuming that those “imported” are prone to such violent tendencies.

    Mr. Anon—”Yeah, right. Because a day hardly goes by when a pentacostalist doesn’t decapitate someone.”

    War between two religious groups need not involve physical altercations or murderous actions. It is also a clash of ideas, one in which the power of the pen strikes down the opponent with equal ferocity.

    Furthermore, you really should read up on those loving Christians in the Central African Republic or in Nigeria.

    Citizen, would you like to know more?

    Mr. Anon—“Do you let anyone into your house who might want to come in?”

    I let people in I know, as well as who my friends know, who are in some cases complete strangers. It’s called trust.

    Anon—“Yes. Yes I do. Doesn’t everyone think that not chopping people’s heads off is more civilized than chopping people’s heads off?”

    You need to understand context. Here is the exchange. Ponder it a moment.

    Auntie Analogue—“Christian fundamentalist fanatics take their kids out of public school.”

    Me—“And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?

    • Replies: @anon
    You need to understand context. Here is the exchange. Ponder it a moment.

    I understood the context then, and I understand it now, and yes. Not chopping people's heads off is still more civilized then chopping people's heads off.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "“But we do want a few nations to ourselves. And what is wrong with that?”"

    "First, who is “we”?"

    Me and my kind. Not you and yours.

    "“Yes, we already have our own murderers, rapists, conmen, thieves, and drunk-drivers. So why should we want to import still more?”"

    "Assuming that those “imported” are prone to such violent tendencies."

    It doesn't matter if they are prone or not. Some fraction of them will be violent criminals. Those are extra violent criminals we wouldn't have by not admitting them. And - yes - a lot of the people who are coming here, Mexicans and Africans for example, are more prone to commit violent crime than are Europeans. Their crime rates, both here and in their own countries, attest to that.

    Maybe you shouldn't pretent to be a smart person. It's obviously too much effort for you and you're not any good at it. Just accept that you are not very bright and go to somewhere else more your own speed. HuffPo, for example.
  258. I founded this link via a post on Drudge Report. Looks like Jimmy Carter did the same thing then Trump want to do in 1979 during the Iranian Revolition. http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261062/carter-banned-iranians-coming-us-during-hostage-daniel-greenfield

  259. @Corvinus
    Mr. Anon—“A misstatement amounting to a lie. But lies and dissembling are all we ever get from you.”

    There is no misinterpretation on my account. You partake in this blog, you know exactly who are the posters that have their particular fetishes.

    Mr. Anon—“But we do want a few nations to ourselves. And what is wrong with that?”

    First, who is “we”? Second, are not “whites”, however you define them, able to make their own decisions regarding “non-whites” and their level of involvement or participation in American society? OR, must all “whites” be in lock-step with this vision that America is only for “them”?

    Mr. Anon—“Yes, we already have our own murderers, rapists, conmen, thieves, and drunk-drivers. So why should we want to import still more?”

    Assuming that those “imported” are prone to such violent tendencies.

    Mr. Anon—"Yeah, right. Because a day hardly goes by when a pentacostalist doesn’t decapitate someone.”

    War between two religious groups need not involve physical altercations or murderous actions. It is also a clash of ideas, one in which the power of the pen strikes down the opponent with equal ferocity.

    Furthermore, you really should read up on those loving Christians in the Central African Republic or in Nigeria.

    Citizen, would you like to know more?

    Mr. Anon—“Do you let anyone into your house who might want to come in?”

    I let people in I know, as well as who my friends know, who are in some cases complete strangers. It’s called trust.

    Anon—“Yes. Yes I do. Doesn’t everyone think that not chopping people’s heads off is more civilized than chopping people’s heads off?”

    You need to understand context. Here is the exchange. Ponder it a moment.

    Auntie Analogue—“Christian fundamentalist fanatics take their kids out of public school.”

    Me—“And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?

    You need to understand context. Here is the exchange. Ponder it a moment.

    I understood the context then, and I understand it now, and yes. Not chopping people’s heads off is still more civilized then chopping people’s heads off.

  260. @iSteveFan

    You are right, this is over the top. I personally do not support why Trump says on this. That he thinks we could prevent American citizen Muslims overseas from returning for awhile shows just how much he is not a man of details.
     
    Here is Rush's take on what Trump was doing by his over the top statement.


    They wouldn't be seen reading Trump's book!

    Right in The Art of the Deal Trump says, if you're serious in a negotiation about wanting something -- and, by the way, being serious is the only time to enter into it -- and if there's something dead certain you've gotta have, you have got to start out with the most outrageous position. The opener has got to be so outrageous that the compromise is exactly what you want. The opener is the most outrageous demand that you can make.
     

    The mainstream’s refusal to learn from Trump’s book mirrors its refusal to learn from Obama’s.

  261. @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    Obviously all 7 billion people in the world have a right to immigrate to the West.

    However, Representative Hank Johnson is worried that the West will capsize, like he feared would happen to Guam.

    So we need to displace some weight back to the rest of the world.

    So send all of those reactionary cishet Christian privileged whites, I mean ALL of them, out to the rest of the world (now empty) and lock them up on one of the continents by themselves and put a wall around them.

    I'll have a coke

    http://cbsn.ws/1TYQQhR

    However, Representative Hank Johnson is worried that the West will capsize, like he feared would happen to Guam.

    Are you sure he wasn’t kidding? I’m not.

  262. @Corvinus
    Mr. Anon—Wow. It’s like this Trump guy thinks that politicians should actually carry out the wishes of their constituents.

    SOME of their constituents, mind you.

    Jim Sweeney—Say a 25 year moratorium which wouold give us time to vet all those here now, deprt illegal aliens as well as radical jihadists or other similar types.

    How are YOU able to tell who are the “radical jihadists”? Do you use a magic eight ball?

    Hail—A civilization, faced with a crisis…

    Yes, a crisis involving those Muslims who are actively involved in the destruction of America. That does NOT mean every single man, woman, and child who practices Islam in the United States.

    Svigor—Then, regrettably, we’ll have to place a moratorium on all immigration.

    That’s anti-white.

    “How are YOU able to tell who are the “radical jihadists”? Do you use a magic eight ball?

    Keep out all muslims. Then we don’t have to figure out which is which.

    We don’t have to allow them to come here – any of them. It is not their right. Permission to emigrate to America is entirely within our gift.

  263. @Corvinus
    Mr. Anon—“A misstatement amounting to a lie. But lies and dissembling are all we ever get from you.”

    There is no misinterpretation on my account. You partake in this blog, you know exactly who are the posters that have their particular fetishes.

    Mr. Anon—“But we do want a few nations to ourselves. And what is wrong with that?”

    First, who is “we”? Second, are not “whites”, however you define them, able to make their own decisions regarding “non-whites” and their level of involvement or participation in American society? OR, must all “whites” be in lock-step with this vision that America is only for “them”?

    Mr. Anon—“Yes, we already have our own murderers, rapists, conmen, thieves, and drunk-drivers. So why should we want to import still more?”

    Assuming that those “imported” are prone to such violent tendencies.

    Mr. Anon—"Yeah, right. Because a day hardly goes by when a pentacostalist doesn’t decapitate someone.”

    War between two religious groups need not involve physical altercations or murderous actions. It is also a clash of ideas, one in which the power of the pen strikes down the opponent with equal ferocity.

    Furthermore, you really should read up on those loving Christians in the Central African Republic or in Nigeria.

    Citizen, would you like to know more?

    Mr. Anon—“Do you let anyone into your house who might want to come in?”

    I let people in I know, as well as who my friends know, who are in some cases complete strangers. It’s called trust.

    Anon—“Yes. Yes I do. Doesn’t everyone think that not chopping people’s heads off is more civilized than chopping people’s heads off?”

    You need to understand context. Here is the exchange. Ponder it a moment.

    Auntie Analogue—“Christian fundamentalist fanatics take their kids out of public school.”

    Me—“And teach them how to decapitate infidels and heathens in their own manner. What, you think because heads aren’t being lopped off that they are “more civilized”?

    ““But we do want a few nations to ourselves. And what is wrong with that?””

    “First, who is “we”?”

    Me and my kind. Not you and yours.

    ““Yes, we already have our own murderers, rapists, conmen, thieves, and drunk-drivers. So why should we want to import still more?””

    “Assuming that those “imported” are prone to such violent tendencies.”

    It doesn’t matter if they are prone or not. Some fraction of them will be violent criminals. Those are extra violent criminals we wouldn’t have by not admitting them. And – yes – a lot of the people who are coming here, Mexicans and Africans for example, are more prone to commit violent crime than are Europeans. Their crime rates, both here and in their own countries, attest to that.

    Maybe you shouldn’t pretent to be a smart person. It’s obviously too much effort for you and you’re not any good at it. Just accept that you are not very bright and go to somewhere else more your own speed. HuffPo, for example.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    “Keep out all muslims. Then we don’t have to figure out which is which.”

    Why don't we just remove all Europeans and their ancestors since they don't belong here in the first place. That's how logical you sound.

    “We don’t have to allow them to come here – any of them. It is not their right. Permission to emigrate to America is entirely within our gift.”



    No, it is not their right. But permission was already granted by our Congress, who serves the interests of their constituents. It’s called majority rules. Perhaps you should run for office and work to make changes in immigration laws.

    “Me and my kind. Not you and yours.”

    So, you’re Jewish. Nice!

    “Some fraction of them will be violent criminals. Those are extra violent criminals we wouldn’t have by not admitting them.”

    No more “extra violent” than our home grown criminals, with sprinkles on top.

    “And – yes – a lot of the people who are coming here, Mexicans and Africans for example, are more prone to commit violent crime than are Europeans. Their crime rates, both here and in their own countries, attest to that.”

    No more prone than, say those first or second generation European immigrants who had come to our shores.

    “Maybe you shouldn’t pretent to be a smart person. It’s obviously too much effort for you and you’re not any good at it. Just accept that you are not very bright and go to somewhere else more your own speed. HuffPo, for example.”

    I will admit, projection is your strong suit. Well done.
  264. @Mr. Anon
    "“But we do want a few nations to ourselves. And what is wrong with that?”"

    "First, who is “we”?"

    Me and my kind. Not you and yours.

    "“Yes, we already have our own murderers, rapists, conmen, thieves, and drunk-drivers. So why should we want to import still more?”"

    "Assuming that those “imported” are prone to such violent tendencies."

    It doesn't matter if they are prone or not. Some fraction of them will be violent criminals. Those are extra violent criminals we wouldn't have by not admitting them. And - yes - a lot of the people who are coming here, Mexicans and Africans for example, are more prone to commit violent crime than are Europeans. Their crime rates, both here and in their own countries, attest to that.

    Maybe you shouldn't pretent to be a smart person. It's obviously too much effort for you and you're not any good at it. Just accept that you are not very bright and go to somewhere else more your own speed. HuffPo, for example.

    “Keep out all muslims. Then we don’t have to figure out which is which.”

    Why don’t we just remove all Europeans and their ancestors since they don’t belong here in the first place. That’s how logical you sound.

    “We don’t have to allow them to come here – any of them. It is not their right. Permission to emigrate to America is entirely within our gift.”



    No, it is not their right. But permission was already granted by our Congress, who serves the interests of their constituents. It’s called majority rules. Perhaps you should run for office and work to make changes in immigration laws.

    “Me and my kind. Not you and yours.”

    So, you’re Jewish. Nice!

    “Some fraction of them will be violent criminals. Those are extra violent criminals we wouldn’t have by not admitting them.”

    No more “extra violent” than our home grown criminals, with sprinkles on top.

    “And – yes – a lot of the people who are coming here, Mexicans and Africans for example, are more prone to commit violent crime than are Europeans. Their crime rates, both here and in their own countries, attest to that.”

    No more prone than, say those first or second generation European immigrants who had come to our shores.

    “Maybe you shouldn’t pretent to be a smart person. It’s obviously too much effort for you and you’re not any good at it. Just accept that you are not very bright and go to somewhere else more your own speed. HuffPo, for example.”

    I will admit, projection is your strong suit. Well done.

  265. Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Donald also has proven uncommon signs of humility, most notably in Mickey’s As soon as Upon a Christmas , when Huey, Dewey and Louie’s pranks damage
    Christmas for him and the whole family. When the
    tree falls on him, instead of yelling at his nephews,
    he stays sadly silent, humilated and defeated,
    while Daisy comforts him.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2