So over the next 90 days, they plan to come up with a vetting process that is sometimes called "extreme". I'm wondering what that will look like. Personally, I would be in favor of a Muhammadan test, but apparently that's against the law. If they can find a way to verify the conditions mentioned in the Executive Order, i would be pleased. Theoretically, no Sharia-Soldier could pass such a test, and the test would be legal. Personally, I would like to see a priority for persons who can prove they are trying to leave Muhammadanism, and because they have left, or are trying to leave it, they are endangered. Not just those leaving Muhammadanism, but those leaving Muhammad worshiping areas out of endangerment, which would include Christians, merely for being Christian. This may seem a little cognitive dissonant given that Christians respect scriptures, for example, that lionize the outrageous actions of Sampson, that elevate the prurient musings of the "Song of Solomon" (not to mention Solomon's outrageous polygamy), that justify regional ethnic cleansing and the taking of booty and slaves, and give most of the weight of their own scriptures to a former Pharisee wannabe (Saul/Paul) with fewer credentials than Mohammed. But the statistics hold that Christian's don't turn to violence as a political, ideological and cultural (misogyny) means-to-an-end as do the mindless believers in Mohammed and his ways (threats, deceptions, guerrilla warfare, raids, and booty taking). Likewise those with the courage to leave the kissing of Mohammed's ass to a billion other faith filled fools. Despite the awful scope of Christian and Jewish scriptures, a very good argument can be made that says the atrocities advocated in their religio-ethnic books have been CONTAINED to a designated REGION (the area given to Abraham), and/or, in the case of global conquest, there are edicts that limit the warfare to merely a psychological front, leaving no room for overtly violent methods. We have also seen that the Jews no longer take orders from leaders who claim to hear the voice of Jehovah in their head, who then order homeless tribes to ethnically cleanse new regions, beyond what was given to Abraham, to take as their own homeland. Instead, they wait upon a Messiah to do the dirty work of expanding earthly conquest. I think it is safe to say that the Jewish threat is CONTAINED, if you don't include the building of more houses on the West Bank, in territory taken in the 1967 defensive war. At any rate, they now behave like a democracy, appear to be a nation of MODERN laws, and seem to have a decent toleration of anyone from any religion that they feel reasonably assured is not a threat to anyone in their given REGION. In both cases, both Jewish and Judeo-Christian (an offshoot of Judaism), behavior is PREDICTABLE, at least withing modern democracies. When Christianity goes outside the bounds of a modern democracy, such as to regions of Africa, behavior is less predictable, and you could very well see overt violence rise up against any group of sinners that are demonized in the scriptures of the un-indicted Paul. But there something about the Koran...something IN the Koran, that unleashes overtly violent conquest worldwide, in a process that is becoming more and more sophisticated, including the weaponized insemination of regions targeted for conquest using a combination of weaponized immigration and weaponized birthrate. Whatever it is, in the Koran, it has never been quarantined, never been reformed, never been reinterpreted, never been disavowed by any modern adherent to Mohammed's nasty narrative. The Koran continues to license murder, based on the voices in the head of Mohammed, without any additional voices in the heads of more modern prophets of religio-hatred. With the Koran as motive, overt violence, all over the world, all the time...is PREDICTABLE. So long as you believe in the voices in the head of Mohammed, you are a threat to the national security of ANY nation, and not just America. So now, getting back to EXTREME VETTING, i would like to see people put out videos like the following, proving they are quitting the Mohammed addiction, or leaving a Mohammed infested area: What i'm looking for, are creative ideas that will allow for people like this to come in, and/or Christians coming from areas recently attacked by Mohammed's ideological children. I don't have a lot of pity for Mohammedan's who call themselves Muslim, but have no clue what their scriptures contain, or worse, NO CARE what their scriptures contain. Not a lot of pity for people like the Mayor of London, who bullshit their way into modern democracies with myths of a "religion of peace". Assuming a free pass to all the relatives of each immigrant/refugee, there really needs to be a test to weed out cognitively dissonant minds attached to bodies that can't discriminate...or won't discriminate. I'm looking for creative vetting ideas that would keep DECEPTIVE ADVOCATES of Sharia Law OUT, while allowing in bona-fide asylum-seeking refugees as persons leaving the bloody sword of legacy Muhammad dominated areas. In addition to that, i would like to see immigration be reformed. I would like to see the active recruitment of persons from any nation, but not just any person. Instead of waiting for people to line up trying to get in, we should seek out a quota of people to bring in. In business this is called "head hunting". By selecting good leaders in every nation, the people from those nations may see that good leadership may be rewarded. This would incentive the peoples of all nations to do something that would put them on America's immigration radar for recruitment. In my opinion, the head-hunting should be the purview of the Executive Branch of government, just as so many other appointments are the purview of the President, starting with the President's cabinet, working on out to the heads of so many agencies, as well as Supreme Court nominees. Why not let the President preside, perhaps through the State Department, over the admission of a yearly quota of immigrants, screened ACCORDING TO THE VALUES OF THE PRESIDENT? Why wouldn't the President's values be "American" values? Why can't we let the President select a quota of whatever kind of people he wants for immigration? Pretty sure that's what Obama did, only, without any transparency. At this point, i'm reminded of a movie, The Internship, with Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson, where these guys had to go through some extreme vetting to get a job with Google. Here's a movie trailer of two old white guys trying to get into an extremely multicultural company against all odds: Turns out that the most important interview was being conducted surreptitiously by someone high in management, if not one of the owners, who hung around campus like an unpopular dweeb. Instead of sending out CIA spies, why not send out CIA dweebs to vet out people from every nation, surreptitiously conducting interviews under a hundred guises, trying to find people who can actually meet the conditions mentioned in the President's recent Executive Order. There would literally be no way to SPOOF the interview with a FAKE value system.
Big article. 1. Only contributors allowed in. Not costs. No welfare queens. 2. Only those who love America, Americans, American values, and the Constitution will be allowed in. Hate America? Americans? American values? The Constitution? Done. Goodbye. The test will screen out any and all Sharia supporters. All those motherfuckers getting the boot. Fuck em.
Here's an idea. Remember when Thomas Jefferson made his own cut-and-past Bible sans any reference to miracles? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible Why not publish a neo-Koran, sans all the hate filled vitriol that fuels violent jihad? Then, you're sitting at a table with a prospective immigrant from a predominantly Muslim country. You've got a dozen scriptures and/or ideological manuscripts that you line up in front of the applicant, telling them that if they are accepted, they will be swearing an oath, kind of like when the President swears an oath to uphold the Constitution. We all know the President will often choose to put his/her hand on a Judeo-Christian Bible, even though it has nothing to do with the Constitution, and no one really knows why. The moral of the story is you are allowed to swear an oath using your most respected literature (besides the Constitution) as a prop to insure the veracity of the oath. Ok, got it so far? You've got all these scriptures and ideological manuscripts, all of which are acceptable for taking an oath, except ONE. That's right, the UN-REDACTED KORAN is the only one that is NOT ACCEPTABLE. At this point, some stupid ACLU lawyer will argue against a religious test. But what is actually happening is the applicant is being offered two versions of the Koran (as well as any number of other scriptures) to choose from if/when s/he takes an oath to value the American system of government. There's the original version, and there's the redacted version, minus all the hate-filled vitriol that incites fools to murder in the name of faith. If you examine the hate-filled murder inducing segments of the Koran, i think it would be hard for any ACLU lawyer to argue that such incitement is an acceptable religion, if it could be called a religion at all. Here's where it get's tricky. First you show the interviewee all the hate filled vitriol in the redacted version of the Koran. Then the interviewer has to act as if any choice is acceptable. If, after being informed of what has been redacted from the edited Koran, the interviewee still chooses the original Koran, then...FAIL. I think this idea would pass prohibitions against any religious test. Essentially, it says any religion is passable, except this one that contains all this hate-filled vitriol that incites violence, sedition and subversion.
"Take your time....Oh and while your contemplating this Ahmed.... we're so nice we're even providing breakfast. Welcome to America. Eat up... you're all skin and bones".
You will have the rabid atheist lefties like stuff and futurecurrents loving this. Foot in the door to eventually stop anyone proclaiming their faith.
One more requirement I would put in this list.... You must learn English. Doesn't mean you can't embrace your own language and speak it, but if you can't speak our language, we're not going to accommodate you.
An immigrant may be extreme vetted and pass every test, but it is generally the sons of muslim immigrants that become terrorists. The parents may be happy to reach a safe country, but the male children are now growing up in an environment where merely being a man does not place them above women. They may get rejected by western women, and wish that they were brought up in the old country, where they could just buy a woman to serve them and bear children. The old country where a man is always right if he quotes the Koran, and this makes him more intelligent than any Nobel prize winner, and certainly above any non muslim. Unsuccessful sons can rebel against everything western, and wish for their ideal vision of an Islamic paradise. Death to unbelievers. Its a sad thing really, because I have seen religion do great things where people gather together in a positive spirit and help each other through the bad times.