User avatar
By CrispyCracker
Last night a bizarre post morphed into a political thread. The central issue is whether or not the current/temporary ban put in place by the White House is focused on 1) religion or 2) geographic regions that are known terrorist hotbeds. It's clearly the latter, but you won't get that sort of truth from a hyperbolic media... and too many folks are content to choke down what they're served by a pantingly progressive media. But this fact remains: the vast majority of latter-day terrorist acts are perpetrated by followers of Islam/Allah.

If I have an issue with the ban it's that it's not sweeping enough. Yes, I realize that it's aimed at seven countries where immigrants are immediately fleeing in large numbers, and the new administration is looking to temporarily stop this flow until they can do a better job of filtering out the bad guys. But recent history proves that radical islamic terrorism comes from a much broader sphere, including countries like Morroco, Algeria, and even Saudi Arabia (origin of most of the 911 hijackers).

I've never been a big Trump fan, but it's simplistic to blame him alone for this policy. This is a new administration taking tough steps to protect the American people as was promised on the campaign trail...not a hate-fueled crusade against a prominent religion. And, like it or not, it's popular with millions of Americans who also believe in personal freedoms and the many positive aspects of a racially diverse populace.

There, I feel better.
User avatar
By pbrstreetgang
Nope. This is religious-based, rhetorical garbage. Whatever measures go into place need to be applied evenly. If you are going to hold up one person's entry, it must be even across the board. We need to have a standard for entry - regardless of country of origin.

I am sure that passports can still be faked, walls can be defeated (Maginot Line anyone?), and all the other scary shit driving fear reactions from feeble-minded people will continue, and will get better than the preventative measures meant to stop them. And what if a Muslim from naughty countries decide to adopt the Republican method? You know, pretending to be Christian?

Stop being so dense. As a security professional, reactions are not solutions. Fluid responses are. And they take time and constant observation to remain fluid and stable. And who will be paying for all this? Apparently us now. Signing something into "law" without having solid definitions is wrong, and opens the door for more threats, to our freedoms as well.

There, now you can also feel better educated.
User avatar
By CrispyCracker
pbr wrote:
"Signing something into "law" without having solid definitions is wrong,"
Funny how it's only been "wrong" since Trump took office. :roll: Remember Pelosi's line on Obamacare? "Pass the bill and then you can find out what's in it." The past 8 years have been defined by an arrogant disdain for checks and balances.
"I am sure that passports can still be faked, walls can be defeated (Maginot Line anyone?)"
Funny you should reference the French. Do you know anyone from that country, or from the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, et al? Ask them what "open-minded" immigration policies have wrought in their own backyard. I have a friend who owns a fast-food franchise in Nice. When a terrorist drove a truck over men, women and children there last year she was "protected" from terrorists by the local Chechen mob since she pays them monthly "dues." Think that's the vision French revolutionaries had in mind for their beloved country?

No disrespect, but your post is replete with empty platitudes. Painting folks like me as dumb deplorables makes you feel smug and enlightened, but at the expense of truth. And it's of little wonder that you're willing to do so, considering how convincingly the counter-case has been made. Obama recently claimed that during his 8-year tenure "no foreign terrorist organization has successfully planned and executed an attack on our homeland." He said it with a straight face, ignoring the facts pasted below, and his fawning fans chugged the glaring lie down with gusto.

Demonize Trump if you wish. It's your prerogative. But the order in place is only temporary, and it's a genuine attempt to protect American citizens from very legit dangers associated with loose immigrations policies that have led to such chaos and unrest throughout Europe. And that's a good thing no matter how it's spun by those who oppose it.

Little Rock, Arkansas, June 1, 2009. Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad shot and murdered one soldier, Army Pvt. William Andrew Long, and injured another, Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula, at a military recruiting station in Little Rock. Muhammad reportedly converted to Islam in college and was on the FBI's radar after being arrested in Yemen–a hotbed of radical Islamic terrorism–for using a Somali passport, even though he was a U.S. citizen. In a note to an Arkansas judge, Muhammad claimed to be a member of al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula, the terror group's Yemen chapter.

Fort Hood, Texas, November 5, 2009. Major Nidal Malik Hasan shot up a military base in Fort Hood and murdered 14 people. Hasan was in contact with al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki prior to the attack and shouted "Allahu Akbar!" as he fired upon the soldiers on the Fort Hood base. After being sentenced to death, Hasan requested to join ISIS while on death row. It took six years for Obama to acknowledge the shooting as a terror attack instead of "workplace violence."

Boston, Massachusetts, April 15, 2013. Tamerlan and Dhozkar Tsarnaev set off two bombs at the 2013 Boston marathon, killing three and injuring over 260 people. The Tsarnaev brothers later shot and murdered Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer Sean Collier. The Tsarnaev brothers were self-radicalized through online jihadist propaganda and through a mosque with ties to al-Qaeda.

Moore, Oklahoma, September 24, 2014. Alton Nolen beheaded a woman, Colleen Huff, at a Vaughan Foods plant and stabbed and injured another person. While Nolen's motives are unclear, he appears to have been another radicalized Muslim who was obsessed with beheadings.

Queens, New York, October 23, 2014. Zale Thompson, another self-radicalized Muslim, injured two police officers with a hatchet before being shot dead by other cops. Thompson reportedly indoctrinated himself with ISIS, al-Qaeda and al-Shabab–a Somali jihadist terror group–websites and was a lone wolf attacker.

Brooklyn, New York, December 20, 2014. Ismaayil Brinsley shot and murdered two police officers execution-style and his Facebook page featured jihadist postings and had ties to a terror-linked mosque.

Garland, Texas, May 3, 2015. Two gunmen shot up the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, where a Mohammed cartoon contest was taking place, and were killed by a police officer. ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack.

Chattanooga, Tennessee, July 16, 2015. Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez shot and killed four Marines and a sailor at a military base in Chattanooga and was believed to have been inspired by ISIS.

San Bernardino, California, December 14, 2015. Two radical Islamists, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, shot and murdered 14 people and injured 22 others at an office holiday party.

Orlando, Florida, June 12, 2016. Omar Mateen, 29, opened fire at a gay nightclub, killing 49 and injuring 53. The FBI investigated Mateen twice before his rampage, but did not take any substantive action. Officials believe Mateen was self-radicalized but he pledged fealty to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi before his death. "The real muslims will never accept the filthy ways of the west," Mateen posted on his Facebook page after committing his heinous act at Pulse nightclub. "I pledge my alliance to (ISIS leader) abu bakr al Baghdadi..may Allah accept me," he wrote.

St. Cloud, Minnesota, September 17, 2016. Dahir Ahmed Adan, a 20-year-old Somali refugee, began hacking at people with a steak knife at a Minnesota mall, injuring nine people before he was shot dead by off-duty police officer Jason Falconer. The FBI said numerous witnesses heard Adan yelling "Allahu akbar!" and "Islam! Islam!" during the rampage. He also asked potential victims if they were Muslims before inflicting wounds in their heads, necks, and chests. The FBI believe he had recently become self-radicalized. (As the Daily Wire highlighted, the Minneapolis Star Tribune attempted to blame "anti-Muslim tensions" for his murderous actions.)

New York City/New Jersey, September 17, 2016. Ahmad Khan Rahami, a 28-year-old naturalized citizen from Afghanistan, set off multiple bombs in New York and New Jersey. In Chelsea, his bomb resulted in the injury of over 30 people. Rahami wrote in his journal that he was connected to "terrorist leaders," and appears to have been heavily influenced by Sheikh Anwar, Anwar al-Awlaki, Nidal Hassan, and Osama bin Laden. "I pray to the beautiful wise ALLAH, [d]o not take JIHAD away from me," Rahami wrote. "You [USA Government] continue your [unintelligible] slaught[er]" against the holy warriors, "be it Afghanistan, Iraq, Sham [Syria], Palestine ... "

Columbus, Ohio, November 28, 2016. Abdul Razak Ali Artan, an ISIS-inspired 20-year-old Somali refugee who had been granted permanent legal residence in 2014 after living in Pakistan for 7 years, attempted to run over his fellow Ohio State students on campus. After his car was stopped by a barrier, he got out of the vehicle and began hacking at people with a butcher knife before being shot dead by a campus police officer. He injured 11 people, one critically. ISIS took credit for the attack, describing Artan as their "soldier." Just three minutes before his rampage, Artan posted a warning to America on Facebook that the "lone wolf attacks" will continue until America "give[s] peace to the Muslims." He also praised deceased al-Qaeda cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki as a "hero."
User avatar
By pbrstreetgang
1. Where and when did I say it was ever right? You assume too much - again. And your comment loudly states "They did it, now we get to." How does that make things better? Or are you one of the pussies that needs everything to be fair. You sound like a closet leftist coward. Go figure.

2. The French comment - a decent red herring attempt. Bravo-ish, kinda...not really. I do appreciate your broadstroke reactions though. It's funny to watch you struggle through convincing yourself you are right. Which I am not saying you are or you aren't.

3. How do you intend to handle potential radicalized Americans? Or will that automagically go away when the walls go up?

You are missing the point - if we are going to vet, vet equally. Burning cycles on singled-out nation states is so fucking obvious. Yet the somehow people think this will curtail a problem. This kind of shit planning is just going to shift the game to different fields if we do not have a standard. Why is some fucking white guy from Britain less of a threat than some 055 sympathizer? Because the latter is obvious?

We need consistency as there are diplomatic issues to address as well. So, is the best plan to really further poke the fucking psychotic religious fanatics nest in the middle east, or to just have a standard for entry that "protects us" equally, regardless of nation of origin?

Sometimes not paying attention to the annoying little fucks of the world goes further than highlighting them and giving them a platform. I should listen to my own advice sometimes. However, it is too fun watching you twist and turn

Edito - El finale
User avatar
By BigCliff
CrispyCracker wrote:I've never been a big Trump fan, but it's simplistic to blame him alone for this policy. This is a new administration taking tough steps to protect the American people as was promised on the campaign trail...
You're saying we shouldn't blame him alone for the promises he made on the campaign trail?

I'm now fully convinced that your brain doesn't work and that I shouldn't give you any more of my time. Thanks for making that quick and easy.
User avatar
By CrispyCracker
Pbr, you're starting to flail a bit.

I’m not proposing a “get even” tactic.. just a ”make it right again” approach. We can retain our sovereignty and ramp up the odds of keeping our citizens safe with more stringent immigration laws…while at the same time maintaining a healthy respect for the benefits of cultural diversity. They are not mutually exclusive.
“You sound like a closet leftist coward”
I've been called a lot of things, but "leftist" ain't one. :mrgreen:
“The French comment - a decent red herring attempt”
I didn’t fabricate the problems that France is experiencing with its Muslim population. Polls show that one-third of French Muslims want the full application of Islamic sharia law. They also show that the overwhelming majority of French Muslims support jihad. You should read more.
“How do you intend to handle potential radicalized Americans? Or will that automagically go away when the walls go up?”
You do realize that a lack of a wall will lead to even more radicalized Americans over time, right? Do you think a liberal immigration policy will reduce the number?
“You are missing the point - if we are going to vet, vet equally.”
No, you are missing the point, son. Select areas of the world spawn the most terrorists, which detonates any notion of "equality" among immigrant groups. To ignore that basic fact out of some misguided sense of “fairness” is simply stupid.
“We need consistency as there are diplomatic issues to address as well.”
Oh, piss on that. Why aren’t other Muslim countries the clear path for immigrants from places like Syria? Why is it our obligation when they could just as easily migrate to countries that share their basic belief system? It’s not bad diplomacy to consider whether people you are letting in will pose a threat or adjust to your culture. Again, ask a European which ideology spawns immigrants that are most notorious for refusing to conform to a host country’s cultural and civic standards. Then get back to me. Again, if we followed the course set out over the last eight years we’ll move inexorably toward the failed European “open borders” model. It’s worth noting that such policies were put in place against the will of the people, as Brexit attests. And it’s the will of the US people that has empowered the current administration. If a democratic outcome doesn’t sit well with you maybe you can join the host of celebrities who threatened to move if Trump was elected...before shutting their whiny cakeholes.

BigCliff wrote:
“You're saying we shouldn't blame him alone for the promises he made on the campaign trail?”
Not if those policies make sense. Then again, you need to have a lick of sense to discern as much.
User avatar
By -G-
Guys like Crispy make me want to reevaluate my conservative views on abortion.
User avatar
By yard4sale
So you came to a fly fishing board to post gear fishing reports and talk politics?

Just fukn leave man. Nobody here gives 2 shits what you have to say.

Quote me all you want but you will be the first person I've put on ignore since COL. Adios fucktard.
User avatar
By Kfoxwyo
I am unsure as to why - but call it a reasonability test. And this is not an attempt to kidnap your thread. My guess is that if there is one area where we share a modest mutual interest it might be gun ownership. In disclosure, I inherited my grandfather collection, and with my own interests own likely near 50 firearms in total. Three are semi-automatic firearms here in CA, one in Montana and the rest reside in Wyoming. In what is arguable one of the most restrictive states in our Union, it is still unbelievably easy to legally, apply, purchase and own a weapon of war (my opinion). I have two HK pistols and a HK semi aoutomatic rifle here in the great state of California. I know the weapon of war is a less popular term or unlike more used tactical terms these days with the kids and who have a bug out bag. To also be fair, I have a simple supply kit more due to earth quake than a riot but who knows these days.

My simple stance is it is far easier here to own a firearm than pass the written drivers test in the same state. With the basic assumption that you are not already a criminal. So my question to you sir CC, is it to easy to own a firearm in this country or should it be more restrictive for the sake of our internal safety.
User avatar
By kish
Great..... now we're gonna be treated to a seven paragraph essay on the 2nd amendment.
User avatar
By upshitscreek
Cracker, you'll ignore what i have to say because you're simply an idiot.

Nonetheless, every noob doesn't get hazed. If you come in here with some cool content and a good attitude people will point to an empty seat. Ain't a soul on this board who doesn't want to see some new blood with some quality goods to offer. Not a soul.

However, every know-it-all cumstain like you gets told to fuck off, though. There's a big difference.

The Drake doesn't want you. Straight shit. It's sincere, not hazing.

You are on your 14th out 15 minutes of attention now. It will wind down and you'll be ignored.

Do not confuse being ignored with acceptance.

Folks will still hammer you here and there. But mostly, just ignored.

So do us a favor... Logout.
User avatar
By austrotard
IMG_0796.jpg (933.78 KiB) Viewed 4010 times
heil mitch.jpg
heil mitch.jpg (15.5 KiB) Viewed 4010 times
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 23
Happy Canada Day, Canadians

Canada's alright if you like saxophones Should be […]

So is it "Dutch ass" ham, or Dutch &qu[…]

Thumbing Through Some SBSs

Splitsville Spundun Emerger https://live.sta[…]

Subscribe to The Drake Magazine