A Trump victory at least offers the hope that our Ship of Fools will begin the long, slow process of adjusting its inexorably ingrained course headed straight for the Iceslamberg.
While I doubt Trump will be able to do anything radically significant with regard to the problem of Islam in the course of four years (or even two terms), his rhetoric around that problem, compared with any other American politician, is so markedly refreshing, albeit incomplete, that it augurs well for initiating the necessary precondition for the glacial change we need to undergo (hopefully with the rest of the West reconfiguring along) to reorient -- or rather re-Occidentalize -- our way.
8 comments:
Simply removing the known Islamists from key defense and law enforcement roles would go a long way to helping....
Here another insanity:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/whoa-baby-why-american-surrogates-are-demand-chinese-families-942832
The foreign babies birthed by American surrogates are awarded birthright citizenship - giving foreigners the 'right' to vote and run for political office.
Then there's the State Dept ceding assignment of refugee status to the IOC Muslim controlled United Nations. Trump taking that process back into the hands of the United States would be a huge help.
Trump can do a lot if he reacts in ways similar to how he did the next time there is a major Jihad attack anywhere - it doesn't even have to be in the US
DIPSHIT DONKEY:
"While I doubt Trump will be able to do anything radically significant with regard to the problem of Islam in the course of four years (or even two terms), his rhetoric around that problem, compared with any other American politician, is so markedly refreshing, albeit incomplete..."
Same old, same old from the donkey. Never satisfied, always doubting, because only he - Fessitude - is the Master of the CounterJihad.
_____________________________________________
The fact that you doubt him is squarely indicative of your idiocy and narcissism. His rhetoric is not "incomplete". He has said very plainly that he intends to halt ALL immigration to the USA by Muslims. That is not "incomplete".
Now go ahead and try to counter that, you little weasel. You're in this for yourself and noone else and you are a disgrace to the CJ.
Shame on you.
His rhetoric is not "incomplete". He has said very plainly that he intends to halt ALL immigration to the USA by Muslims. That is not "incomplete".
In Trump's speech at the RNC in July of this year, he alluded to his Moratorium of December of 2015. His language had changed from "all Muslims" to some granularization thereof:
...we must immediately suspend immigration from any nation that has been compromised by terrorism until such time as proven vetting mechanisms have been put in place. My opponent has called for a radical 550% increase in Syrian refugees on top of existing massive refugee flows coming into our country under President Obama. She proposes this despite the fact that there’s no way to screen these refugees in order to find out who they are or where they come from. I only want to admit individuals into our country who will support our values and love our people. Anyone who endorses violence, hatred or oppression is not welcome in our country and never will be.
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2016/07/nobodys-perfect.html
I would hope that Trump considers all Muslim nations to be "compromised by terrorism" but somehow I doubt it (since, for example, he has announced his willingness to work with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and he has not made any pronouncements about condemning them as the terrorist nations they are). Secondly, Muslim jihadists are notoriously cosmpolitan, and often immigrant "from" some other non-Muslim country. One of the 911 hijackers had been living in Germany for years and came to the US from there. Under Trump's rhetoric, that Muslim (Mohamed Atta), who had been living in Hamburg for a decade before mobilizing with his brothers to attack America would not be "coming from a nation that is compromised by terrorism". Not to mention that Egypt, where he was born and grew up, would likely not count for Trump as a nation "compromised by terrorism". The lack of a clear list of which nations count for Trump is a sign of being incomplete; and the lack of a condemnation of all Muslim nations as being "compromised by terrorism" is another sign of being incomplete.
Also, notice the conspicuous lack of the I and M words in Trump's RNC speech.
Further, Trump (rightly) castigates Hillary for failing to see that one cannot tell the difference among Muslims between those who are dangerous and those who are harmless, thus indicating rationally that vetting is impossible; but then not only does he explicitly endorse vetting, he turns around and interates a principle of vetting:
"I only want to admit individuals into our country who will support our values and love our people. Anyone who endorses violence, hatred or oppression is not welcome in our country and never will be"
With Muslims, there's no way of knowing, with sufficient certitude on a macro scale (the only scale that matters for a nation's safety) which ones "will support our values" and which ones are lying to us.
So I reiterate that Trump is a salutary change; but not perfect. If we the West don't get better on the problem of Islam in time, our civilization will be destroyed. As I say in my essay, Trump offers hope that we may begin the long, slow, complex process of doing so (it's long, slow, and complex precisely because of all the layers of PC MC bullshit that have built up over the decades).
But for those, like "Anonymous" up above, who don't think the metastasizing problem of Mohammedanism reviving its perennial jihad in our time (using stealth as much as the sword) is that big of a problem, of course he's obtusely sanguine about the prospects of or solving it in time.
Hesp, See Number 28. If the Femocrats know it, then the Republicans know it - and hybrid Trump knows it....
http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com
But for those, like "Anonymous" up above, who don't think the metastasizing problem of Mohammedanism reviving its perennial jihad in our time (using stealth as much as the sword) is that big of a problem
are you reader of brain? you know wat other peoples tink ?How you know wat other persons tink????????????????
you writes
With Muslims, there's no way of knowing, with sufficient certitude on a macro scale (the only scale that matters for a nation's safety) which ones "will support our values" and which ones are lying to us.
why you know wat amonymus tink but not know what moslems tink????? why not you brain read moslems as well as you read amonymus?????
Post a Comment