Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

Recommended Photo Store
 
Buy Through Our Amazon Link or Banner to Support This Blog
 
 
 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Trump’s Dumb Muslim Plan

    Posted by TM Lutas on December 9th, 2015 (All posts by )

    To do a valid Christian baptism requires some water, a Christian to administer it, and about 15 seconds. Licitness so that all the proper paperwork is done and the newly baptized Christian is properly educated could take a year but if you don’t give a hoot for the niceties or it’s an emergency, 15 seconds will do. That’s all that is required to get around Trump’s Muslim ban. This makes his plan a stupid plan. It is worse than useless. It is an anti-screen. Honest Muslims who want medical treatment or just to go shopping will be stopped. For a terrorist, it’s hardly a speed bump.

    That isn’t to say that there is no room to change our immigration system to improve things. It’s just not this one. Trump has the money to hire the best help in formulating a real plan and he came out with a stupid stinker instead.

    The better solution, and one that would be perfectly understood by Trump’s base would be a straightforward declaration that private courts including religious courts that issue judgments that call for the injury or death of americans are enemies of America. To aid them as a U.S. citizen is treason, and any of their agents or bailiffs are in an immigration-excludable category that gets put on the DS-156 right next to the item asking are you a Nazi.

    We don’t need anything complicated. Nobody reasonable is going to get bent out of shape over the declaration of our enemy being people who seek to kill or hurt us. The ones who do protest it will be doing us all a service. Hardly any administrative procedures have to be changed, only one form.

    Trump wouldn’t have had to break a sweat selling this. But he didn’t. Why did he push his dumb plan instead?

     

    44 Responses to “Trump’s Dumb Muslim Plan”

    1. Mrs. Davis Says:

      Because it’s simple, appeals to his base, and makes him the center of media attention.

    2. Jonathan Says:

      makes him the center of media attention

      That’s most of it. He can finesse the fine points later. He’s helping his campaign.

      He’s also moved publicly acceptable discussion from “Americans who want to scrutinize Muslim visitors more carefully are racists” to “How do we best protect America from Islamist terrorists?”. I think proposals to ban Islam or Muslims are foolish but also that it’s very important to reevaluate our immigration policies. The Democrats and the Left have framed public discussion of these matters in ways that prevented serious consideration of measures that most Americans probably want. Regardless of the merits of his position, Trump has single handedly shifted the public conversation to where it should have been from the beginning.

    3. TM Lutas Says:

      Jonathan – You’re making a great case for Donald Trump for Press Secretary (and wouln’t *that* be a wild ride). For President, not so much.

    4. KaiserDerden Says:

      as usual a pointy headed response that shows you are clueless but soooooo PC that you make sure you tell everyone how “smart” and un-bigoted you are … tool …

    5. Sgt. Mom Says:

      That’s Trump’s value in all this – he breaks the shell of PC, and makes it acceptable, or at least relevant, to bring up difficult topics … like this particular matter.

    6. Grurray Says:

      For the most radical forms of Islam that are a threat to us, apostasy is punishable by death. Terrorist disguising themselves as Christians doesn’t fit the profile. Disguising themselves as tourists, students, fiances, or, in the case of French attacks, as refugees has happened.

      It would take some extraordinary occurrences for terror operatives to disguise themselves as Christians. I’m not saying it couldn’t happen, but it’s unlikely knowing what we know.

    7. Trent Telenko Says:

      TM Lutas,

      Trump has merged the issues of Muslim Terrorism and Open Borders Immigration in the minds of the public.

      AKA “Trump’s Wall” type Border control = Fighting Muslim Terrorism.

      It is now a political tar baby that Democratic Progressives and Open Borders big money driven GOP candidates cannot keep fighting.

      Get used to saying “President Trump.”

      You will be saying it for the rest of your life after Nov 2016.

    8. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      Y’all do realize that the actual implementation of this, if history is a guideline, will not be a religious test for individuals, but rather simply a ban on entry and non-diplomatic presence for nationals from the countries that make up the 57 states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation:

      Afghanistan
      Albania
      Algeria
      Azerbaijan
      Bahrain
      Bangladesh
      Benin
      Brunei Darussalam
      Burkina Faso
      Cameroon
      Chad
      Comoros
      Cote d’Ivoire
      Djibouti
      Egypt
      Gabon
      The Gambia
      Guinea
      Guinea-Bissau
      Guyana
      Indonesia
      Iran
      Iraq
      Jordan
      Kazakhstan
      Kuwait
      Kyrgyzstan
      Lebanon
      Libya
      Malaysia
      Maldives
      Mali
      Mauritania
      Morocco
      Mozambique
      Niger
      Nigeria
      Oman
      Pakistan
      Palestine State (proposed)
      Qatar
      Saudi Arabia
      Senegal
      Sierra Leone
      Somalia
      Sudan
      Surinam
      Syria
      Tajikistan
      Togo
      Tunisia
      Turkey
      Turkmenistan
      Uganda
      United Arab Emirates
      Uzbekistan
      Yemen

      Yes, there will be economic retaliation. It will be in the form of an oil embargo. Which would make us energy independent because of fracking.

    9. TM Lutas Says:

      KaiserDerden – Consider a real life example of muslim aggression inside the USA. A young muslim teen (14 years old) was not wearing hijab and her uncle objected, strenuously and physically. He grabbed her by the hair and dragged her away to get dressed to meet islamic standards. Under Trump’s plan, nothing happens to that guy except an assault conviction. Under the plan I outlined, he gets his naturalization reversed and deported for violently enforcing a private court decision of an enemy of the USA. But I’m the pointy head and Trump’s the tough guy standing up to make america great. Right.

      Here’s the Blaze’s report on the incident:
      http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/11/28/police-14-year-old-slapped-dragged-out-of-school-by-her-hair-for-not-wearing-muslim-headscarf-where-it-allegedly-happened-might-irritate-you/

      Subotai Bahadur – We import christian pastors from some of those countries (Egypt’s Coptic Church springs to mind). You really think that it’s going to fly to deny R visas for priests, monks, and nuns? Really?

      Well, maybe you might have a point if there wasn’t a domestic muslim component to the Trump proposal where he’s looking to not let them back in if they go abroad. I don’t see how you do that without there being a religious test.

    10. TM Lutas Says:

      Trent Telenko – There is one way out of that tar baby situation (which I agree exists). Attack Trump’s plan for its defects in accomplishing the goal Trump sets out and lay out a plan that better accomplishes the goal Trump says he’s for and you’ve got a winning hand.

    11. DirtyJobsGuy Says:

      Trump did it just like he does everything, to buff his public image. He doesn’t think about these things much, but reads his audience like a pro. Remember this is a man who loves eminent domain for private developments, the Constitution be dammed. This is a guy who wakes up to get his summary of all news stories that mention him every day! Not the overall economic conditions, not the market, not political news just all about him.

      If you want a surprisingly fair assessment of Trump as a businessman and promoter, this story from the Atlantic is right on the button.

      http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/whats-the-deal-with-donald-trump/309261/

    12. Trent Telenko Says:

      TM Lutis,

      Please See:

      8 USC §1182:

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

      Any American President already has this constitutionally tested statutory law to exclude any non-citizen for any reason or no reason.

      Pres. Jimmy Carter used this statute to exclude all Iranians in 1979.

    13. Trent Telenko Says:

      T.M. Lutis

      This Mark Kirkorian’s National Review Article‏ on the legality of Trump’s proposal, where I got the statute above:

      It’s Time for a Grown-Up Alternative to Trump’s Crude Muslim-Immigration Proposal

      By Mark Krikorian — December 8, 2015

      Which says the following —

      If “respectable” politicians refuse to even talk about the real problems caused by mass Muslim immigration, then a larger and larger share of the public will turn to carnival barkers (AKA TRUMP) unafraid of elite disapproval.

      and this

      As the Washington Times noted, immigration “is having the unintended consequence of creating an enclave of immigrants with high unemployment that is both stressing the state’s safety net and creating a rich pool of potential recruiting targets for Islamist terror groups.” And many of those recruits are native-born, having grown up steeped in Islamic supremacism and alienated from the values of their native land.

      and this

      But if we just keep doing what we’re doing now, we can’t expect a different result. Trump’s sweeping call to stop all Muslim travel to the U.S. will resonate with people rightly frustrated with our rulers’ insouciant approach to the threat we face.

      The DC elites would rather die than change on open borders policy, even in the face of domestic Muslim terrorism, so die they will.

      Trump, as the American Republic’s Sulla, is now on deck to arrange it.

      The reason I say that is because Trump’s rhetorical gift is to say the words on everyone’s lips that are never heard.

      Words that are ignored in popular culture…save rarely…and then only as a prop for progressive media moral superiority signaling.

      That gift, combined with the political fall out of the San Bernadino attack, will make him President.

    14. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      TM Lutas Says:
      December 9th, 2015 at 2:39 pm

      In reference to the BLAZE story, it did not note the citizenship status of the uncle. If he was not a citizen, his visa/naturalization process could be revoked now for the conviction. It won’t though, because the NCA approves of such conduct and even if it is prosecuted to a conviction nothing will be done because he is Muslim and it is not PC to treat them under our law. The attack on the 14 year old girl was not ordered by a specific sharia court order, the demand that she be covered in Islamic fashion is from the Quran and the Hadiths.

      If he is not a citizen, he would be gone under Trump’s/Carter’s/Obama’s[*] plan.

      If he is a citizen, he should be charged. There would be not only assault, but also child abuse charges available and a possible aggravating factor of it happening on school grounds.

      But once again, the problem there is not the applicability of the law, but the lack of will by the government to enforce what we have.

      [*]-see below.

      As far as the matter of pastors coming from those countries, right now under Obama’s interpretation of the law, Christians are barred as refugees because they “are not at risk”. Obama [*] plays games with the immigration law to favor Muslims and discriminate against Christians.

      Christians are being wiped out in the Middle East. The number of pastors coming in may or may not be worth the risk to the lives of Americans threatened by the Muslims admitted.

      Anything we do involves making choices, and choices have consequences. Not all of them are good. There is never a “happily ever after for everybody” solution when dealing with humans in groups.

      If we continue to admit what are functionally unvetted Muslims en-masse [like now] we will be attacked again and again. If we cut off immigration and visitors visas from Muslim countries; we may lose some theoretical benefit that only Muslims can bring us that we desperately need [I admit to being at a loss as to what that might be]; but we save the lives of Americans. Maintaining the status quo will do nothing for persecuted Christians, priests or not, because we are not letting them in anyway.

    15. TM Lutas Says:

      Trent Telenko – It never even crossed my mind that the President might lack authority to exclude immigrants. The difficulty would be political. Excluding christian pastors to minister to US congregations because they are from a ME variant of christianity is not likely to sit well with Trump supporters. Neither will sticking the US federal government’s nose into what is or is not a valid baptism. “Who is a real christian” is not a game the US government should be playing.

      I’m actually flattered that Krikorian’s generally headed in the same direction of restrictionism that’s better crafted than Trump’s version. I assure you it’s entirely independent.

      Subotai Bahadur – The R visa category has nothing to do with refugees but is a well established visa for temporary or permanent immigration of religious workers. I’m reasonably sure that there’s disagreement among imams on whether grabbing your niece by the hair and dragging her out of public view is acceptable behavior and that when challenged more often than not, out will pop a particular fatwa. The whole point of the idea is to get the guys who can’t help themselves pop off and get violent (usually with their womenfolk) are shown the exit and deported.

      There is a US norm that really needs to be reasserted. When religious law and US secular law come into conflict regarding matters of violence, religious law cedes the field. The plan I advocate would do that, Trump’s plan would not.

    16. vxxc2014 Says:

      TM Lutas,

      You seem to think our government has some interest in using the Laws to defend the country or its borders.

      In the teeth of the evidence that bit us again a week ago I will add. Bit. Again.

      Trump’s proposal is politically feasible and possible in terms of making him President. As for Defending the Country or denying entrance the President as noted above can already do so…and he doesn’t.

      Also as noted above for some reason the DC Elites would rather die than give up open borders so die they will.

      Finally rather like the race card using words like dumb or grown up have quite lost their power except perhaps to inflame matters further. The grownups are traitorous, venal and morally autistic [see what I mean] and had better step aside. We’re coming, and we’re coming because we have to.

      It’s fight or die and Trump gets it.

    17. Mike K Says:

      “the DC Elites would rather die than give up open borders so die they will.”

      You mean they would rather we die……

      They have armed bodyguards. Maybe if that Paris bomber had gotten into the stadium where Hollande was.

    18. vxxc2014 Says:

      “You mean they would rather we die……”

      My Dear Sir what else is the point of opening the borders?

      It’s hard for Americans to swallow as we have a young nation’s history but it’s an old story for the rest of the world.

    19. Veryretired Says:

      Trump will be running as an independent, as was the plan all along, because he knows very well that the establishment GOP will never nominate him.

      By being as outrageous and non-PC as possible, he creates a media storm which drowns out much of what the other candidates are saying, and reduces them to the role of endlessly responding to him, and media questions about his positions, instead of mounting any consistent campaigns of their own. Reports from this past week even show him drowning out the “big speech”by the leader of the current regime.

      Trump is gathering support from all the frustrated republican and independent voters, and some normally dem minorities, because he is saying things that so many people feel and believe, but whose opinions are ignored by the main-line GOP, and routinely disparaged by the progressive’s captive msm.

      As I have said before, Trump will not be the Republican nominee, nor will Hillary be the nominee for the Dems. Trump is a new version of the Perot vote diversion that worked so well for the Clintons before.

      No one, however, expected Trump’s deliberate non-PC schtick to be so popular, because both sides totally misread how thoroughly disgusted the general public is with the incompetence and corruption of the ruling coalition party, which has become so blatantly obvious that even the endless covering up by the media can’t disguise it as legitimate government.

      We are in a period very comparable to the deep divisions that emerged in this country during the 1850’s, and the world very much resembles the unstable period of the 1930’s.

      Expect to hear a resurgence in popularity of such songs as “Onward Christian Soldiers” and “Battle Hymn of the Republic” as symbols of a new militancy on the part of the majority culture, and some truly pitched battles in the streets as the election cycle continues into November of 2016. The conventions will be especially volatile both inside and out.

      We live in interesting times.

    20. dearieme Says:

      “a resurgence in popularity of such songs as”: let’s hope it won’t include ‘John Brown’s body ….’. The chap was a terrorist, after all.

    21. Mr Black Says:

      Over at AoSHQ, Ace made a rather interesting remark that as the establishment is committed to legacy failure, they’ll oppose Trumps ideas. And it occurred to me that an awful lot of those ordinary people on the right are also committed to legacy failure. They mostly or completely buy into PC cultural notions but just want to paint a conservative face on them. Trump is doing us a HUGE favor. He is demolishing all barriers to discussion and clearing the way for totally new ideas and new ways of doing things. Too many on the right are still talking in terms of the lefts agenda, when they should be leaping on this golden opportunity to break from the path and provide solutions.

      So you think a muslim ban won’t work because they’ll lie? Then fine, let’s SOLVE that problem. If you were born in a muslim country you are automatically denied entry unless you can PROVE you reject islam. And it’s up to them to prove it, not up to us to bury our doubts. And if that’s still not working, a total blanket ban. This is a path to a real, lasting solution. If you’re tired old ideas still have a core of progressive talking points, just stop talking.

    22. Tyouth Says:

      The admin. might have capitulated WRT incoming Muslims. That is, tighter visa controls, etc. Trump’s (rather off-the-cuff proposal) differs only in degree. The less stringent measures will look pretty weak when the next student/social worker cult member kills/injures 15 or 20 people.

      A leader can get too far out in front of the led. Trump may have done this with those vested in the elite’s manipulative version of reality. WRT to his core followers and those who CAN be persuaded, not so much.

    23. Vladimir Dorta Says:

      I hope this debate includes one thing our elites don’t want to touch with a ten-foot pole: Islam is not a religion in the sense we Americans think of religion, otherwise you can’t explain why Imams hide weapons in mosques (France now, World Trade Center “blind sheikh”). Islam is a political, social and religious system all in one and should be treated as such.

    24. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      dearieme Says:
      December 10th, 2015 at 3:26 am

      I actually was thinking more of the updated version of “Jefferson and Liberty”. ;-)

    25. TM Lutas Says:

      Vxxc2014 – I’m interested in solving problems. Trump’s plan is a dumb plan because, on its own terms, it doesn’t work. If it worked but the goal was wrong, I would say it was wrong, perhaps evil, but I wouldn’t characterize it as dumb. Accomplishing the goal of smart restrictions on immigration is possible and I hope I showed at least a good chunk of how we could do it. The objectionable sort of Islam doesn’t survive very well in an arena of equal rights and religious liberty. Forcing it to operate without privilege with no tolerance of their habit of slapping people around and worse when things aren’t as they like will end up being a soft kill situation. Their communities will assimilate and they will see their children becoming something else.

      Using extrajudicial violence (private judicial violence really) to enforce islamic cultural norms is terrorism only in its most extreme manifestations. The person who slaps a girl for not being modest in the islamic sense, the acid thrower, the catcallers, most of this stuff doesn’t really fit the terrorism frame. A lot of this needs to be fixed non-federally but the declaration of an enemy, that has to come from the federal level and ideally the President.

      The DC elites will not be fixed by President Trump doing anything vis a vis Islam. They will be fixed by the elimination of the civil service system and the wholesale ejection of the mandarinate out of the bureaucratic crannies of power and ideally by shrinking a few cabinet departments down to zero. You can’t responsibly do that without measuring what the government does but that’s a different conversation.

      Mr black – The US has a religious peace based on the principle that the State doesn’t get involved with the Church. We don’t look like Bosnia during the Yugoslav wars of succession in large part because, by and large, we stick to a few basic rules on the subject that amount to neutrality. Losing that neutrality would be a tremendous blow to this country. Forcing us off our officially neutral stance with regard to religion is a great prize for the Islamists. I want to deny them that prize. This is why I presented an alternative that profoundly challenges a judicially centered religion like Islam but does it from a place of sectarian neutrality and with a clear line between what is acceptable behavior and what is unacceptable and will get you booted from the country or tried as a traitor.

      I am all for finding solutions and getting past the current left/right impasse. They just have to be functional solutions that don’t dump us back into the days when Islam was winning.

      Vladimir Dorta – Islam *is* different. It’s incumbent upon us to know how and exactly what the problem points are. Here’s a good starter:
      http://www.firstthings.com/article/2015/01/challenging-radical-islam

    26. Trent Telenko Says:

      Veryretired,

      Trump does not need to run as an independent.

      Trump will win both the Republican nomination and the general election for the simple reason there will be multiple major terrorist incidents in the West between now and Nov 2016.

      Trump’s move to ban Muslim immigration is exactly the gambit he made with saying that American Muslim’s celebrated 9/11/2001 in New Jersey before San Bernadino.

      Trump made a bet on putting money on a guaranteed high percentage return for a high probability of success investment.

      The GOP Establishment may run an independent Romney to try and stop Trump after the GOP Convention. I’d expect Romney in 2016 to be just as effective as Anderson was in throwing the 1980 election to Carter.

    27. Sgt. Mom Says:

      Is Islam, strictly speaking, a religion as we commonly accept it in the West? Or an aggressive social, economic, and political movement with a scrim of religion carefully draped over it to provide cover and plausible deniability?

    28. Mike K Says:

      Trump will win both the Republican nomination and the general election for the simple reason there will be multiple major terrorist incidents in the West between now and Nov 2016.

      I fully expect this and there will be vigorous attempts to hide the truth, such as the associations of the UC, Merced stabbing attacker.

      Have you seen this anywhere else ?

      Police have described Faisal Mohammed as a loner who was acting the way he did after a disagreement he had with a study group he was part of. After being booted out of the group, he was so incensed, Faisal charted out a plan to kill his own classmates. The four-page manifesto found with him had entries that revealed his sinister intentions. Authorities are now investigating if there is something more to the attack than just a rejection by his classmates — especially after the discovery of the ISIS flag and the clearly written manifesto.
      According to Patrick Dunleavy, a former deputy inspector general with the New York State Police Criminal Intelligence Unit, Faisal’s character “fits exactly with what ISIS is looking for, individuals to go and do an act of terrorism unilaterally.”

      We will see quite a few of these. Of course Trump will be blamed for inciting them.

    29. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      Trent Telenko Says:
      December 10th, 2015 at 5:02 pm

      I think a Trump win is quite possible, if the GOPe plays “fair”. However, Rule 40b that was changed in 2012 lets them force a brokered convention even if Trump comes into the convention with the most delegates.

      Just a few minutes ago, AOS HQ posted that Priebus, McConnell, and 22 others are meeting to plot a brokered convention.

      http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=360499

      Keep in mind that the Republican Party would rather lose to Hillary than win with someone they do not control.

      Given that both parties are after him and a lot of money and power is at stake, it would be wise for Trump to be very sure about his security detail(s).

    30. dearieme Says:

      “it would be wise for Trump to be very sure about his security detail(s)”: I’m sorry to say that that had occurred to me too.

    31. Mike K Says:

      “the Republican Party would rather lose to Hillary than win with someone they do not control.”

      I’m not sure if it looked like he might really win. The big fear is that he will take the party off the cliff that Perot did in 1992.

      There are people in Congress who do not want a win by Trump but I think they are a minority. Donors, on the other hand, are adamant against him.

      The Tea Party learned that lesson.

    32. Michael Hiteshew Says:

      >>Donors, on the other hand, are adamant against him.

      Because he will not beholden to them, I assume.

    33. Mr Black Says:

      I don’t think people can really be convinced that islam is a civilizational threat. You either recognize it as such, or you refuse to recognize it as such because “that’s not who you are”. If a persons self-image doesn’t let them see the world in true color, the only thing that will shake their confidence is more blood.

    34. Mike K Says:

      “Because he will not beholden to them, I assume.”

      That and his agenda is not theirs, at least he says so.

      I wonder if Muslims are smart enough to avoid more incidents next year ? I doubt it.

    35. Trent Telenko Says:

      >>I wonder if Muslims are smart enough to avoid more incidents next year ? I doubt it.

      ISIS is on a mission from God, and the Obama Administration stopped investigations of radical mosques in 2012, so yes there will be more attacks.

      See:

      http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/12/10/whistleblower-says-he-could-have-prevented-ca-attack-if-government-didnt-cut-funding

      Philip Haney told Megyn Kelly tonight that as part of his investigation, he was looking into a collection of global networks that were infiltrating radical Islamists into the U.S.

      But a year into the investigation, Haney said they got a visit from the State Department and the Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, who said that tracking these groups was problematic because they were Islamic.

      His investigation was shut down and 67 of his records were deleted, including one into an organization with ties to the mosque in Riverside, Calif., that San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook attended.

      NB: The Obama Administration won’t delete illegally held gun purchase data on American citizens, but it did so for records of terrorist affiliated foreign Muslims.

      The Obama’s State Department and the Homeland Security’s “Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties” minions shutting down Mosque surveillance for three years — from 2012 to San Bernadino — puts Hillary in the same “Muslim terrorist hugging” cross hairs as Obama.

      The three year surveillance lapse makes further domestic terror attacks before the 2016 election a certainty, because even after San Bernadino, Obama and Lynch won’t raid radical Muslim Mosques.

      Trump can credibly say Obama and Hillary would rather the American streets run red with the blood of dozens of Americans than raid a Radical Muslim Mosque…and he will.

      During the last lame duck year of an unpopular president’s final term, the FBI must be in full rebellion for fear of institutional the consequence’s of that lapse.

      The FBI counter-intelligence budget is at stake!! .

      There is another FBI “leaking during Watergate ‘Deep Throat'” in the Democratic Party’s near future. The only question is who he will be leaking too. Trump? Fox News? Bill Gertz? Or some internet news site?

    36. Trent Telenko Says:

      The Daily Caller has the real reason why former Homeland Security investigator turned whistleblower Philip Haney had his files deleted —

      http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/11/pro-coal-democrat-pays-epa-220k-for-building-ponds-on-his-property/

      In the process of shutting down Haney’s inquiry, the feds also deleted his files, which included information on an organization with ties to Farook’s mosque, San Bernardino’s Deobandi movement-affiliated Dar-al-Uloom al-Islamia.

      And Farook’s wife and accomplice, Tashfeen Malik, went to school at Pakistan’s al-Huda, which also has ties to the Deobandi movement.

      As the global intelligence group Stratfor has reported, Talighi Jamaat has been linked to a number of attempted terrorist attacks targeting the U.S.

      Members of the sect were tied to the Oct. 2002 Portland Seven case and the Sept. 2002 Lackawanna Six case. Members were also involved in an Aug. 2006 plot to bomb airliners en route from London to the U.S. and attempted bombings in London and Glasgow, Scotland in July 2007. Stratfor also reported that Talighi Jamaat affiliates were involved in the the July 7, 2005 bombings. That attack left 52 dead and more than 700 injured.

    37. Grurray Says:

      ISIS members are probably already here

      American authorities are warning the terror group’s followers may have infiltrated American borders with authentic-looking passports ISIS has printed itself with its own machines, according to an intelligence report obtained by ABC News.

    38. Trent Telenko Says:

      ?!?

      What the heck happened to my Daily Caller URL?

      This is what I thought I posted —

      http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/10/report-obama-told-nsc-to-downplay-terrorist-angle-of-san-bernadino/

      Let’s see if it stays.

    39. TMLutas Says:

      Mr black – It is in our best interest to define the civilizational threat well and narrowly in order to minimize collateral damage. That so many muslims think it OK to set up private courts that enforce violent judgments like beatings, amputations, and death penalties without regard to national sovereignty *is* a civilizational threat. That somebody says the Shahada *is not* a civilizational threat.

      The problem with Trump is that he’s advocating a double mastectomy when a lumpectomy would do just fine. The problem with the elites is that they’re prescribing chamomile tea for breast cancer with the occasional coffee high colonic when the pain gets bad. Clearly, the elite approach isn’t even worth discussing other than to deride it, but that doesn’t translate into approval for Trump’s solution. It can be wrong too and in this case, it is.

    40. Mike K Says:

      Too many people are taking Trump literally when he uses bombast to get attention and then seems to fine tune his proposals.

      It is objectionable to many of us used to “conservative” proposals but it is better than no proposals at all.

      We are drowning in a pool of PC BS and making waves may not be pleasant but somebody has to say something. I was particularly ashamed of the response of people like Ryan.

      I lived through World War II at a age where I remember how people dealt with it. My mother had a little statue of Hitler with him bending over and a pin cushion was where his buttocks should be. That was the humor of the time. The British did a movie of Hitler at the French surrender that had him looking like he was dancing.

      Now, we worry about “Islamophobia” or at least the elites and the credentialed would-be elites do. That will change.

      One small sign of sanity creeping back is the fact that the LA Times today printed an intelligent op-ed on gun control.

      If you think precision doesn’t matter, forget about guns for a second. Imagine I’m concerned about dangerous pit bulls, and I’m explaining my views to you, a dog trainer — but I have no grasp of dog terminology.

      Me: I don’t want to take away dog owners’ rights, but we need to do something about pit bulls. We need restrictions on owning an attack dog.

      You: Wait. What’s an “attack dog”?

      Me: You know what I mean. Like military dogs.

      You: Huh? Pit bulls aren’t military dogs. In fact “military dogs” isn’t a thing. You mean like German Shepherds?

      Me: Don’t be ridiculous. Nobody’s trying to take away your German Shepherds. But civilians shouldn’t own fighting dogs.

      It’s well done and by Ken White who blogs at Popehat

    41. Trent Telenko Says:

      TM Lutas,

      According to this gentleman with Reuters/Ipsos polling, Trump is ahead in Republican Primary/Caucus voters in 25 states.

      Trump leading big IA,NH,NC,SC,GA,TENN,MISS,KY,ILL,Mass,PA
      OHIO,NY,Fla,LA,MI,AR,AL,TEX,Alaska,NV,AZ,Mo,OK,Ca

      — DJ Lewis (@umpire43) December 12, 2015

      Two more tweets, same source —

      Trump is now Crushing Hillary in the very Blue California. Trump leads her in the state by 6 points. In GA His republican poll is a wild 47%

      — DJ Lewis (@umpire43) December 12, 2015

      This nomination may be just about over.Trump is over 43% in 8 different States. An Iowa radio Station this morning has Trump over 40%

      — DJ Lewis (@umpire43) December 12, 2015

      IMO, Preference cascade…arriving

      San Bernadino, Obama’s tepid speech and the media/political reaction to Trump’s Muslim Immigration Pause proposal all in response to San Bernadino, plus Trump’s public doubling down his immigration pause in the face of elite disdain, have given Trump the Republican Presidential nomination and likely the Presidency.

      If in fact Hillary is losing to Trump in California…

      …Then Democrats should simply slit their wrists in a warm bath right now.

    42. Lexington Green Says:

      It’s not Trump’s plan. He never said register anybody. Those were the reporter’s words. Nonetheless, he has managed to get the entire world talking about the idea and alternatives to the nonexistent proposal. As usual he has not just move the goalposts, but blown the walls off of the stadium. It is always, following the methodology he outlined in his first book, second only to the Bible in greatness, he starts out with the most extreme possible proposal and negotiate from there. He saw at the beginning of his career that there was a unmet demand for luxury real estate in Manhattan. He saw that Manhattan was going to take off and no one was there to provide what wealthy tenants, residential and business tenants would want. In this case he is looking at a voting public that is sick to death of both political parties, and that huge swathes of political territory had been demurely deemed to be off-limits for polite discussion, by both parties. He saw that he could walk in, ignore these unwritten rules, and reach in enormous base of voters who are desperate for someone to articulate what they wanted. I have absolutely no idea whether he is going to win the domination or the general election. However, I’ve never believed that he was simply going to evaporate, as many supposedly sophisticated observers claimed.

    43. Grurray Says:

      Throwing out an initial high-ball offer in negotiations is called anchoring

       In addition to the initial research conducted by Tversky and Kahneman, multiple other studies have shown that anchoring can greatly influence the estimated value of an object. For instance, although negotiators can generally appraise an offer based on multiple characteristics, studies have shown that they tend to focus on only one aspect. In this way, a deliberate starting point can strongly affect the range of possible counteroffers.

      It may not work with congress – I agree Paul Ryan has been way off base – but it’s solid gold with the voters.
       
      Moving away from everyone else’s positions also draws out and lengthens negotiations to create tension, which is good way to force the issue and coax the other side into settling for satisficing.

      We respond in two ways to tension, depending on how we view the two factors that are creating the tension. If we focus more strongly on a desirable future then this will pull us towards it as we seek to achieve that future. On the other hand, if we focus first on the undesirable present, this has the effect to push us away from it as we seek to avoid a future where the discomfort remains.

      If the tension is strong enough, we will not search for the best solution, we will simply grab at the first one that comes along that will do the job, even if there may be better solutions out there. This is called satisficing.

      The old joke that he’s playing chess when everyone is playing checkers doesn’t even begin to explain these latest developments. He’s playing chess and everyone else doesn’t even know a game has started.

    44. caaronbrown Says:

      Actually, I believe that, under the Catholic understanding of baptism, it is not necessary for a Christian to perform the rite. The person performing the rite must be of the mind to do so according to the Church’s intention when a priest administers it. So, for example, a Jewish nurse could baptize the child of a Catholic woman, if the child were in immediate danger of dying and no priest were present.