I have yet to hear anyone personally say all the strange things Mr. T does are good or Ok and yes I know a few who voted for him and had signs in their yards. Actually they are mum and I don't bring up the topic with them. I only see Fox saying he is great.
We listened to the President’s speech live today as he was giving it 5 blocks from where we were driving (home from a vacation.) He did a decent job. He was here in the St. louis County area to sell the Republican tax cut bill. But his speech was an overview of what is going on with the U.S. Economy, what he still plans to do including border security measures. He didnt target Muslims, however.
He has a limited vocabulary. everything with him is ”tremendous” or “horrible” or “special.” But he delivered it well and kept the crowd entertained.
The literal answer to your question OP is No, I dont think it is exactly OK, but I dont think it is the big deal you think it is. There is plenty of substantiated acts by badnick Muslims performed for political theater that are caught on video, and he could have used those.
Would Danny Pearl’s rolling head be better subject matter for Trump to tweet to get a point across?
Apparently (from my brief investigation) these tweeted videos are not especially egregious acts.
Last edited by iris lilies; 11-29-17 at 6:54pm.
Iris Lilie’s, in the interest of starting a conversation, truly, what exactly do you think is the point he’s trying to get across, and do you agree with it? And why(not)?
I assume the point of his tweet is to remind his Twitter followers that there are badnick Muslim jihadists out there, wanting to create trouble in the U.S. That is an undisputed fact. Should the President of the U.S. put it out there in a casual tweet? Well, considering that he tweets a lot of stuff each day that gets the media all riled up, I see today’s tweet content as beng a little stupider than usual, but still not out of bounds of consideration.Originally Posted by Chicken lady
We learned that the Muslim jihadist who drove the Home Depot truck into a group of people in New York City was here under a lottery immigration program
https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/diversity-visa
And I have to wonder, to whom does this seem even remotely logical? And why?
I cannot groke a world where persons coming into our country are not vetted in some way. Not that I think any bureaucrat will be able to identify all potential badnicks, but to simply throw open the doors of our country to random doobies, that is messed up. And no, I dont want that to happen in my country.
edited to add: I read up more about Sayfullo Saipov and his immigration status. He came into the U.S. via a program called Diversity Immigratin where people are selected and then put throguh a vetting process, but
I do not know if that vetting processes is a rigorous as for other immigration programs.
Anther man, Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, came into our country via the same immigration program And also created death and mayhem when he shot people at LA airport in 1997.
I was less bothered by the videos than by Trump disrupting an event to honor Navajo code talkers to call Elizabeth Warren Pocahontas. Very disrespectful to the veterans by a man who dodged the draft claiming medical issues while playing football, tennis and squash.
I don’t think his base needs reminding. I do not have data at my fingertips, but I have read crime statistics that show that boys like the one who grew up down the street from me kill far more people per capita than Muslim immigrants. I think by choosing a subgroup that is not a primary risk, he is attempting to sow prejudice and division (and create a distraction from other horrible things he is doing) not create a dialog about solving the problem.
My impression is that he would like to block 100% of Muslim immigration - depriving our society of many good and productive citizens and causing more suffering worldwide than is being caused by these terrorist acts - in order to stop a small number of “badnicks”
I agree with your facts on the details you shared about the two criminals mentioned. However, I think we already vet immigrants pretty thoroughly. We could make Americans a lot safer while putting less effort in by “screening” natives. (Internet sites, gun buyers). I think being young, male, and marginalized was far more significant to their behavior than their religion or country of birth.
It would be a more reasonable response to risk for you to give up driving or riding in cars order to avoid becoming a traffic death.
i also have to wonder how our society’s response to these immigrants shapes their acts.
my mom used to say that she opposed interracial marriage if people wanted kids because there were too many problems for the kids. I always responded by being angry that she didn’t see fighting for normalization of interracial marriage and a more decent society was the solution to that, not trying to keep the kids from being born.
how would you you feel if he frequently tweeted about poor inner city black native born Americans committing crimes? He could find several every day.
the overwhelming factor mass murders, arsonists, rapists, pedophiles, bank robbers etc have in common is being native born American males. Maybe he should tweet every day “another AMERICAN MAN committed a violent crime today.” So we don’t forget that we have a problem.
Last edited by Chicken lady; 11-29-17 at 8:33pm.
It doesnt matter what you think in this context of The Prez communing with his “base” because you arent them. He will talk at them about whatever topic they all agree on, and that is kinda the point of his Tweets. Well, that, and maybe to rile up our country’s mainstream media, they get triggered pretty fast from a Trump tweet.
I have no trouble supporting any politician who makes an effort toward thoughtful immigration for those who come from countries where a percentage is higher of jihadists than from other countries. To the idea that it is tiny percentage who may cause trouble, I say: Why take known risks? To enter this country is a privilege, a very special privilege. Why shouldnt someone coming in be fully vetted for the safety of U.S. citizens?
Not all who want to come into the U.S. will be able to get in, there are far too many who want to be here. Let’s pick the best and brightest for the health of our country. Angry young men from jihad countries are not my top pick.
Sure, we have a lot of native angry young men killing people here. I live in the murder capitol of the country and I am well aware that 90% of my city’s murders were perpatrated by a specific demographic, young black men. Asking me how I would “feel” if the Prez tweeted this fact is silly. What do my feelings have to do with anything? If he tweeted this truth, I suppose it would be viewed as race baiting, but it is a sad truth. These young men are fellow citizens and live amoung us as equals. They present a huge social problem that we have some responsibility to address. Citizenship has meaning to me. Citizens have rights.
Why bring in more people who have potential to be angry young men and i stall them as citizens, therefore increasing our responsibilities? We cant fix the social provlems we have now, cant take on more.
Finally, your “impression” that he would block 100% of Muslims is, well, not factual. So I won't address it.
No he won't block all Muslims. Saudi Arabia, home base for the 9/11 hijackers, is not on his bad list because he is buddies with their despotic royal family.
It’s a fact that it is my impression. It’s an impression that he has created in me in part through his choice of emphasis in tweets and executive orders. I was sharing an effect with you. A small, but possibly repeated effect, likely to occur in those far removed from his base (and I agree that the effect on his base is irrelevant in this context. I was trying to say that: having covered “the base”, what effects are being created elsewhere?)
Your feelings normally have a lot to do with your behavior. Few of us act solely from a spocklike motive.
i think people are “fully vetted” now. We could do much better by only admitting females. And banning returning combat soldiers - yes, I know, citizens and service, it is simply a logical act based on statistics. Not one I am advocating.
i feel as if we are not addressing the huge social problem of native born alienated young men and we would all be safer and happier if the energy being put into blocking immigration was put there instead. Again - that is an opinion. I disagree with his focus - but also with his methods, which I think exacerbate the problem rather than contribute to a solution.
reasons to bring immigrants into this country include skills, work ethic, and humanitarian considerations. Children of immigrants statistically perform better in school and contribute more to the economy per capita than children of native born Americans.
how would YOU view tweeting about crime committed by young black men? Not “how do you think it would be viewed” or tweeting about teenage girls engaging in prostitution? Also a common crime. Are either of those different to you and why?
what additional vetting do you think is needed for countries plagued by jihadists?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote