If this is true, and I believe it is true, it is important.
If you support Trump you probably don’t believe this true. That it is “fake news!” Right?
So there are two questions: 1) Do you believe that Trump’s top national security officials were surprised he did not include the Article 5 language? Or Not? 2) Independent of your belief on the trueness of this, what narrative does this data support? Does it support the narrative of: 1) Fake News, 2) Trump is an idiot, 3) Trump is purposefully realigning our alliances.
Trump’s decision to dump the speech and instead dump on NATO shocked even his own team.
It was not until the next day, Thursday, May 25, when Trump started talking at an opening ceremony for NATO’s new Brussels headquarters, that the president’s national security team realized their boss had made a decision with major consequences—without consulting or even informing them in advance of the change.
Instead of the speech that had been carefully written, vetted, and approved in advance, Trump decided to deliver an insulting demand for payment even as a relic from the World Trade Center was being installed to remind the member states of the one time they had been called on to spill blood together—in defense of the United States.
Article 5 is the heart of NATO. It’s the section of NATO’s founding treaty where all the nations that participate in the alliance promise to come to the defense of any member under attack. Article 5 has been invoked exactly one time—by the United States following 9/11. In response […]
Click here to view original web page at www.dailykos.com
Tweet A convenience store in Tennessee is featuring a scrolling digital sign outside the gas station offering $50,000 for Kathy Griffin’s head. Lewis Country Store’s Facebook page is littered with controversial messages in an attempt to garner attention. The store’s Facebook page is very pro-Trump and anti-liberal. Apparently, the […]
Click here to view original web page at oppositionreport.com
FILE PHOTO: A U.S. Customs and Border Protection arm patch and badge is seen at Los Angeles International Airport, California February 20, 2014. The fight over President Donald Trump’s plan to ban temporarily people entering the United States from six predominantly Muslim countries has now boiled down to whether […]
Click here to view original web page at www.reuters.com
This feeds the narrative that we are moving more to the “Alt-Right.”
MADISON, Wis. (AP) – Assembly Republicans moved closer to creating tougher penalties for University of Wisconsin student protesters Tuesday, advancing a bill that would suspend or expel students who disrupt speakers. The Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities approved the bill on an 8-6 vote. This sends the bill […]
Click here to view original web page at www.foxnews.com
Muslims have been trying to immigrate to Western Countries for years because of any number of economic, political, and religious reasons. However, this immigration tide has recently become a Tsunami. So, whether we like it or not, we need to figure out the optimal way to deal with it.
The most obvious first step is to decide if we want to accept any at all, some, or all. If the decision is to not accept any, or accept all, then we can stop the discussion here.
But, if the decision is to accept some, then the next step is to figure out how determine which ones to accept. As a basic principle I would suggest we accept only those that will be a net positive in the community.
How to determine which Muslim we should accept
The problem is that it is impossible to verify their credentials or their motives as they are coming from areas where there are no records available.
Who should then be accountable for approving their acceptance and rooting out actual and potential terrorists?
This would of course be the appropriate government agencies. However, why not get the contribution of the people who have the experience to recognize the individuals most likely to be radicalized, US Muslims already here?
I believe that there should be an approval process, that includes panels of US Muslims, that sign their approval for each individual that is accepted.
If the US Muslim community is not prepared to do this then we should not accept any of these refugees.
This would not only improve the safety of US citizens but also help immigrants, who truly want to join the US Muslim community, integrate successfully. It will also show recognition of the importance of the US Muslim community in supporting all Americans.