Donald Trump team 'discussing plans for Muslim registration system'


mentalfloss
#1
Hitler was not an exaggeration, folks.


Donald Trump team 'discussing plans for Muslim registration system'

Donald Trump’s policy advisers are discussing plans to establish a registry for Muslim immigrants in the US, a man believed to be a key member of the President-elect's transition team has revealed.

Kris Kobach, the secretary of state for Kansas, said the President-elect’s advisers were looking at how to implement a proposal suggested by the billionaire businessman that would force immigrants from Muslim countries to register on a database.

Mr Kobach, who helped devise tough immigration laws in a number of US states and claims to have participated in regular conference calls with Mr Trump’s immigration advisers, also said the Trump administration could push ahead rapidly on construction of a US-Mexico border wall without seeking immediate congressional approval.

The hardline immigration official, whose role has not been confirmed by the President-elect’s transition team but who is thought to be a favourite for the role of Attorney General, said the immigration group had discussed drafting executive orders for the President-elect's review “so that Trump and the Department of Homeland Security hit the ground running”.

Donald Trump team 'discussing plans for Muslim registration system' | The Independent
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
+1
#2
Trump's a libertarian, you know.
 
TenPenny
+1
#3
I would suggest tattooing them with the registration number.
 
Machjo
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

I would suggest tattooing them with the registration number.

Brand it on the forehead, make them wear armbands, and round them up in ghettoes.
 
davesmom
#5
Hahaha!


Read the article:
"....are discussing plans..."
"...were looking at..."
"...could push ahead..."
"...has not been confirmed..."
"...is thought to be..."
"...had discussed.."


Everybody panic!
Speculate, irritate, instigate.....


Reacting to what the Trump administration MIGHT do = arresting a person for what he MIGHT do.
Why don't you all calm down. When something is confirmed, done, is the time to analyze it.
 
DaSleeper
+2
#6
In just the last week...
Keyword(s): trump ; Threads Started By: mentalfloss
Showing results 1 to 32 of 32

Canadian Content Forums - Search Results

Now that's Salty
 
mentalfloss
+2
#7
And you reply to every one of them.
 
Tecumsehsbones
+4
#8
Non-citizens do not have the same rights as citizens. The key right they don't have is "the right to be here." By definition, non-citizens are here by sufferance, and can be deported at any time. Logically, any measure short of deportation (like registration) is therefore also legal and proper.

This is not WWII internment, when citizens of Japanese ancestry, as well as non-citizen immigrants, were interned. Therefore the internment of persons of Japanese ancestry is a false equivalence.

It may have Constitutional trouble because of religious discrimination, but that's easily enough solved. Simply apply the registration requirements to all immigrants from countries designated as "trouble spots" or "high risk for terrorism," regardless of religion.

I don't suppose anybody noticed that this is not a new idea. It merely resurrects a program the U.S. passed after the attacks on 11 Sep 2001, and later halted.
 
mentalfloss
#9
Constitutions often aren't helpful, even in this case.

The policy is more egregious than simply being unconstitutional.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Constitutions often aren't helpful.

Your pissing and moaning is never helpful, so I'll still go with the Constitution, however flawed it may be.
 
mentalfloss
#11
Trump supporter cites Japanese internment camps as 'precedent' for Muslim registry
 
Tecumsehsbones
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Trump supporter cites Japanese internment camps as 'precedent' for Muslim registry

And he's correct. The internment was upheld by the Supreme Court in Korematsu v. U.S. in 1944.

I doubt the current Supremes would uphold registering citizens.
 
mentalfloss
#13
Megyn Kelly shuts down Trump supporter on Muslim registry 'precedent'
 
Murphy
Conservative
+5
#14  Top Rated Post


Isn't it refreshing to see an administration that is going to look into the prevention of potential problems identified with a specific group of people?

To all the worry warts, detailed plans of this initiative have not been decided or announced. Should it go forward in some form, it will be the first positive step in reaction to what has been happening in Europ-istan.

Ask the French, the Swedes, the Germans, etc. how they're making out. Standard immigration policies don't seem to be working. Time to have another look and update outmoded/inefficient methods.
 
mentalfloss
+2
#15
Yes let's fix an outdated model by replacing it with an even more outdated one.

Makes canoodles of sense.
 
Murphy
Conservative
+4
#16
Shhh! Your blathering is disturbing the students who wish to learn.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Murphy View Post


Isn't it refreshing to see an administration that is going to look into the prevention of potential problems identified with a specific group of people?

I'd prefer looking into effective, evidence-based measures, but if they were rational, they wouldn't be white supremacists in the first place, so this really ain't a big surprise.

Quote:

To all the worry warts, detailed plans of this initiative have not been decided or announced. Should it go forward in some form, it will be the first positive step in reaction to what has been happening in Europ-istan.

Well, the first step anyhow.

Quote:

Ask the French, the Swedes, the Germans, etc. how they're making out. Standard immigration policies don't seem to be working. Time to have another look and update outmoded/inefficient methods.

When I was in Luxembourg and Germany in early summer, things looked OK. I'm going to Austria and Germany in a couple weeks. I'll let you know.
 
Murphy
Conservative
#18
You and I are not party to this examination of the situation. I would resist comment until something substantive is announced.

I was in France and Germany in the summer. We saw areas in both countries that were trouble spots. Paris has many more street people. They were doing a creditable job of keeping the touristy areas trouble free, but we kept hearing reports of difficulties moving refugees away from areas where, according to the news, they were not supposed to be.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Murphy View Post

You and I are not party to this examination of the situation. I would resist comment until something substantive is announced.

That's a fine idea. Too bad you already commented.

Quote:

I was in France and Germany in the summer. We saw areas in both countries that were trouble spots. Paris has many more street people. They were doing a creditable job of keeping the touristy areas trouble free, but we kept hearing reports of difficulties moving refugees away from areas where, according to the news, they were not supposed to be.

Well, the French, y'know?
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
+3
#20
Do not worry...they have brought in extra gear to control the rioting...



Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Megyn Kelly shuts down Trump supporter on Muslim registry 'precedent'

Did she finally stop crying? I thought she would continue for months...like you
 
Hoof Hearted
#21
911 was a mistake...

The terrorists decoded the covert message from Bin Laden incorrectly..

Instead of "Fly planes dead into twin towers on 911", it actually read...

"Buy more plain bread, sugar twin and flour for the Seven Eleven"

(Thank you! I'm here all week! Try the fish!!)
 
davesmom
+1
#22
The integration of Muslim immigrants into Western society is a complex situation. It cannot be put in a nutshell and viewed as black and white.
Islam is unique from all other religious groups.


I don't believe there is any opposition to Muslim immigration from anyone IF those Muslims are moderate in their religious practices, if they are seeking way of life different from what they come from or if they are willing to embrace the laws and culture of their adopted country.


Opposition comes from recognition that Muslims coming from countries where Islam, with all of its regulations, male dominance, repression of basic freedoms, etc. is the law. There is a distinct possibility that what they have been raised with and have always known will remain their dogma and will conflict with Western law and culture. This has been seen to be the case in certain instances of so-called honor killings and terrorist acts. It has been seen in instances of Muslim individuals asking for (and too often getting) excused from rules that apply to other citizens.


In the interest of national security surely most people would agree that it is important for immigrants to embrace the laws of their adopted land. With that in mind common sense would dictate that extreme care should be taken to screen prospective immigrants, with special attention to their preferred lifestyle.


It is almost impossible to know whether a family's or individual's intention is to assimilate into its new society. There are many ways to 'dodge the bullet' during screening.
So what is the answer? How can the homeland protect its own interests and still be fair and welcoming?


Are newcomers to America entitled to the same rights as American citizens BEFORE they become legal citizens? I don't know. Perhaps if that is the case there should be a lengthy probation period for the immigrant(s) coming from a country where human rights are not recognized by law? Say a time limit to be looked at after a number of years regarding how well the immigrant(s) have settled in satisfactorily?


Thoughts?
 
Hoof Hearted
+3
#23
Not saying the Muslims are taking over our Country or nothin...

But at a Tim Horton's in Toronto recently, they just had a "Blow Up the Rim to Win" contest.
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by davesmom View Post

The integration of Muslim immigrants into Western society is a complex situation. It cannot be put in a nutshell and viewed as black and white.
Islam is unique from all other religious groups.


I don't believe there is any opposition to Muslim immigration from anyone IF those Muslims are moderate in their religious practices, if they are seeking way of life different from what they come from or if they are willing to embrace the laws and culture of their adopted country.


Opposition comes from recognition that Muslims coming from countries where Islam, with all of its regulations, male dominance, repression of basic freedoms, etc. is the law. There is a distinct possibility that what they have been raised with and have always known will remain their dogma and will conflict with Western law and culture. This has been seen to be the case in certain instances of so-called honor killings and terrorist acts. It has been seen in instances of Muslim individuals asking for (and too often getting) excused from rules that apply to other citizens.


In the interest of national security surely most people would agree that it is important for immigrants to embrace the laws of their adopted land. With that in mind common sense would dictate that extreme care should be taken to screen prospective immigrants, with special attention to their preferred lifestyle.


It is almost impossible to know whether a family's or individual's intention is to assimilate into its new society. There are many ways to 'dodge the bullet' during screening.
So what is the answer? How can the homeland protect its own interests and still be fair and welcoming?


Are newcomers to America entitled to the same rights as American citizens BEFORE they become legal citizens? I don't know. Perhaps if that is the case there should be a lengthy probation period for the immigrant(s) coming from a country where human rights are not recognized by law? Say a time limit to be looked at after a number of years regarding how well the immigrant(s) have settled in satisfactorily?


Thoughts?

Not sure about the US but Canada requires 'Landed Immigrant' status for 5 years before you are eligible for citizenship.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#25
Is it too late to register the Caflicks? Everybody knows they ain't like us and take their orders from Rome.
 
MHz
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

I would suggest tattooing them with the registration number.

How last century is that?? How about choice based on multiple choice where OBL Inc is at the top of the list. Move them away from populated areas.
 
selfsame
-2
#27
The existence of Muslims among the Americans may be like a safety valve: so that God's chastisement may not afflict America.

I read this in the interpretation and was reminded of an incident which I may tell you later on.

Quran 56: 75-76, which mean:
[Then God – be glorified – started to threaten the associaters and disbelievers with a chastisement that will occur in the end of time (and this is its time ), so God – be glorified – swore and said:]

{75. But, no! I swear by the falling [sites] of comets [in the future.]

76. And it is surely an awesome a oath, did you but know [that.]}
.................................................. .............................

76 a Because of its impact and because people will be concerned about it, according to the destruction, ruining and perishing that it will cause.

http://quran-ayat.com/pret/56.htm#a56_75
quran-ayat(dot)com/pret/56(dot)htm#a56_75
 
MHz
#28
It might be noble if the reason for the flight is to cover the escape of the (hired guns) rebel leaders. There have been Syrian refugees for 5 years so why the big push when they are actually taking the country back to it being peaceful again? That means it should come with a 'right to return' option that doesn't require a major crime be committed.

The screening process is supposed to take 2 years so there should be no way somebody could be an undocumented one unless it is by intention of the host nation. Germany seems to have been up to her neck in it if her refugees are as bad as the press makes out.

Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Hitler was not an exaggeration, folks.

Neither was Saddam but he still had a moment where he knew he had been stabbed in the back. The Banksters for Hitler and the US for Saddam. The only difference is the CIA got a bunch of Nazi SS officers as their field operatives.
 
Hoof Hearted
+1
#29
Hey selfsame...

No offense, but your Prophet wrote all of that nonsense during a time of War and strife..

It's like he was trying to pen Huckleberry Finn, but his wife kept vacuuming and demanding he do the dishes during the last minute of a tied Super Bowl game.

Naturally his well-intentioned shpiel became angry and hateful.

Just be thankful that your Canadian freedom allows you to post your drivel on this website.
 
davesmom
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNick View Post

Not sure about the US but Canada requires 'Landed Immigrant' status for 5 years before you are eligible for citizenship.


Thank you for your reply.


I would like some research on this. It seems to me that Immigrants get the same rights as legal citizens as soon as they land on Canadian soil. Whether they are legally entitled or not I just don't know.
There are other discrepancies too that need refining.
Will look into that when (if) I get time.


I thought that I presented some valid concern about Muslim immigrants in my post and some pressing questions. It doesn't seem like there are many poster here who want to be serious about the issue. Just want to and smartass about it! Very brainy!