Until Omar murdered 49 people and maimed another 53, Hillary’s loyal soldier was busy battling Vermon Senator Bernie Sanders– even using combat terms to threaten Sanders, who spent campaign millions to “divide, divide, divide” the Democratic vote away from Hillary. “It’s time for Bernie to stand down,” Nelson ordered.
Nelson also claims that Omar Mateen was “a lone wolf” who took directions from nobody except his own demented psyche. Nelson decries the system that sold Omar the guns he used– a response that ignores the wider problem that murderous Muslim extremists have killed Americans with guns, but also with well-placed pressure cooker bombs. And the 9/11 atrocities were committed in part by men reportedly armed with little more than box cutters, who were prepared to use the planes themselves as weapons of mass destruction.
Ordinarily, I’d just ignore Senator Nelson’s anti-gun, pro-Hillary rant and say, “Well, that’s just the Hillary talking.”
But Senator Nelson is a member of the Committee on Armed Services, which reportedly “deals with our nation’s defense and military, and monitors threats to our national defense through the Emerging Threats and Capabilities subcommittee of which Nelson is ranking member.”
Nelson’s theory that the U.S. government needs to get closer to the “good” Muslims and that these “good” Muslims will then uncover and identify the “bad” Muslims and “out” them to law enforcement is truly a ridiculous, desperate notion that is geared solely to bolstering Hillary’s stated platform of treating ISIS as a non-immigration problem.
And certainly, ISIS is much more than an immigration problem.
But Donald Trump has a plan to use immigration laws and policies to at least do something about ISIS.
Something, at least.
Trump’s plan is far from perfect, but it has a kind of raw genius about it that other countries also plagued with ISIS and ISIS-like problems will immediately recognize. But it involves taking a gutsy, rather un-American step: Banning immigration from ISIS-oriented nations for a period of time, until stock can be taken and a viable strategy implemented at all government levels.
What is wrong with stalling Muslim immigration for a short, discrete period, while facts are determined and a strategy worked out?
Nelson’s theory that “good” Muslims will identify and deter “bad” Muslims is simply ridiculous. I mean, some may do this, but plain old Americans who were not Muslim at all tried to get the FBI to arrest Omar Mateen, and the FBI just chuckled and took Omar at his word– at least TWICE.
Along with halting immigration, or at least making it much more selective, one might add to this the punitive measure of selective deportation.
Believe me, while it might not have been possible to immediately deport Omar, a “born” U.S. national and an Afghani citizen by operation of his parents’ citizenship, the threat of doing it would have an enormously galvanizing affect on just about any immigrant community, and the Muslim immigrant community in particular.
Believe me, many Muslim “home” countries would not hesitate to deport anyone who made a lick of trouble in their kingdoms. And because they know that obedience to the public laws begins at home, the deportation of an entire family is rare, but entirely possible.
Internationally, if a person is a “dual” and has the right to swear allegiance to two or more foreign sovereign states, one state can easily deport them back to the other state– as long as that state agrees to accept its dual national.
And honestly, if Saddiq Mateen wants to be president of Afghanistan, he needs to relinquish his U.S. citizenship, move back to Afghanistan, and live there.
If Saddiq’s son, Omar, frightens honest Americans with his Jihadi talk, perhaps he needs to be deported to the land of Jihad. There, helpful government officials can be persuaded to more fully investigate Omar and do a better job than the FBI did.
Perhaps joint agreements can be reached between the United States and many of the “sending” dual states for the “dual” national to even be prosecuted for crimes in the land of their “dual” nationality.
It is only in this way that perhaps Senator Nelson’s vision of “good Muslims” helping to separate themselves from the “bad Muslims” may evolve.
Do you think for a moment that Iran would tolerate a dual national coming in to Iran and murdering forty-nine people?
Do you think for a moment that Iran would just stand by and permit the family of such a dual national to run a television show supporting a politico-religious group that was dedicated to Iran’s overthrow?
There is free speech, protecting free speech, and then there is a kind of grotesque, almost willful stupidity that allows fanatics to run rampant, without having to consider repercussions.
Americans need to smarten up.
I am not saying that the United States of America should become like Iran. But it would not hurt to start evolving stronger, more powerful policies to deal directly with the problems raised by “dual” citizens, and explore the possibility of immediate deportation and state-to-state relations with handling people who claim allegiance to more than one sovereign power. These policies will necessarily have to necessarily discriminate against certain groups, like Muslims, for at least a short period, in order to keep American citizens who play by the rules safe, or safer than we have been.
There is no doubt that Trump’s policy would present problems, the very least because it harkens back to the days when the United States banned certain foreigners from entering the United States based upon their ideology– a period some view as oppressive. But the Cold War was largely an ideological enterprise. Just switch “Communism” to “Religious Fanaticism,” and use the same tools to fight it as we always have.
Americans are more prepared to wage this war than we think.
On Sunday morning, the world discovered the horrors of the Orlando terror attack at the Pulse gay nightclub.
When America awoke to the news, the social media boards, particularly Twitter and Facebook, exploded. Trump proponents blamed Obama and Clinton and the discussion turned to how President Obama would not use the word “Islamic terror” and would blame guns. Read more