After putting yesterday's post up over on Facebook, I got some blow-back. Not a lot and not too strong because I think the people doing the blowing-back know that as distasteful as my position is, it's the right one. It isn't nice, but it is how I see it and the comments received haven't changed my mind.
Think of it this way. You have invited a family into your home. Your mother, sister, a trusted friend, or someone else in whom you have confidence says, 'take them in, they're good people' or 'take them in, they need a safe place to stay'. So you do. You open your home and let them in and, for a while, all is well.
You get along okay although they have different ways and a different language. Still, it's no more than a little awkward at times. When you bump up against one another there's a nervous chuckle, an awkward smile and you get on with things.
Then, after a while, one or two of them start fussing. They want more space in the refrigerator, or a different kind of food, more or different selection. They don't like the television shows you do, so they start to insist on having the right to pick what shows you all watch. Then they want a different bathroom schedule. They start pushing back against basic courtesy and fight against living by your rules. They aren't assimilating to your standard.
Still, while you're less than thrilled with how things are going, you made a promise. You said that they could stay so you shrink back and bite your tongue, watching as they take more and more territory. The others reassure you, 'it's okay. It's just his/her way. S/he doesn't mean anything by it.' But the territory is gone, handed over, and until they leave there is no going back. It's the new normal.
This is what has happened in the EU and, to a lesser extent, in America with the people we have accepted from the Middle East.
They came and most, the vast majority slid into place without a ripple - and that's great. Welcome to my home.
Some, however, got to fussing, to pushing back and demanding that they wanted things done differently.
In Britain, instead of assimilating to the standard and trying to fit into their new home, some Muslims started fussing. They wanted more control, a separate system within the system so they could be 'free' and kept apart from the rest of the population.
As a result of that non-assimilation, eighty-five Shari'a courts have been set up and instituted to settle disputes within the Muslim community. They don't (yet) have more power than the British courts, but how long will it be before that's not good enough either? How long will it be before the Muslim Imams and leaders demand still more control over their communities?
It's called creeping incrementalism.
First it's a baby step. Nothing big, nothing overt or threatening. Just a teeny-tiny accommodation to keep folks happy. It settles into place, becomes the norm and people adjust and accept it. Then, months or years later another step is taken. That first quarter-inch becomes half-an-inch. It happens again sometime later and then it's an inch, then a foot and finally a mile.
Eventually, what was unthinkable becomes not only thinkable but actuality - and going back is no longer an option.
That is what is happening in Europe right now. That is why this situation is so dangerous.
After yesterday's post I was corrected - there have been protests against ISIS in the streets of Europe but, according to those who corrected me, they're not being covered by the media.
Why not? Well, golly! Let me guess. It's because it would be seen as one of two things: 1) it would be racial profiling and that is not politically correct; or, 2) it would foment reaction from the other citizens which might lead to violence. Either way the result is the same. Media silence is giving a pass to the violent factions and that is encouraging the violent factions to keep doing what they are doing - like bombing airports and subways and killing dozens of innocent people.
By hiding it, by not showing the disgust of the good people for the behavior of the bad, it's opening a door to more of the bad.
What would be far more effective is if those protests against the wicked were carried live on national television. What if those marches and protests were shown to all and sundry? What if it was made clear that the radicalized are pariah and not accepted by the larger community? What if people known to be in sympathy with Daesh or ISIS or IS or whoever it is today are shown to be shunned by their communities? Could that possibly have an effect?
I think so. People are herd creatures. We don't do well in isolation. If parents shun their radicalized children and it's seen by others, that would be a step. If family members of all stripes shun their radicalized parents or siblings or other family members, that would also be a step. If neighbors and colleagues and others in the community do the same, that's another step.
If not-yet radicalized people see that the behavior is unacceptable,
if they recognize that there are serious negative consequences within their social network to that
life-style, that might deter at least some of them from following that
path. Isolation can be a powerful tool - but it must be total or it won't work.
It's also not something that's going to turn the tide in a day or a week or a month. It will take time and persistence, but it can be done and if we start now, all of us who might be able to encourage or support or engage, we could save untold numbers of lives in the future.
Most importantly, though, people within the Muslim community have got to speak up. If they know of something being planned, or something suspicious is going on, they have got to speak up and tell someone who can do something about it. Otherwise they are just as guilty as the perpetrators of the act - accessories before the fact - and they deserve to be vilified and treated just as the guilty.
The people within the community have also got to stand up directly to the Imams and religious leaders - to make it crystal clear that their children are not available to be taught to hate. Madrassas are fertile training grounds used to indoctrinate the next generation to hate. Hate the Jew. Hate the Christian. Hate the secularist. Hate the Shi'a and hate anyone who doesn't think, look, act or worship as you do. That has got to change. Faster than the rest, the drip-drip of hate mongering has got to stop.
If the Madrassas came under the control of good people, loving parents who worship as the Koran allegedly intends based on what we're all being told - that it's the Religion of Peace - that would save a generation.
Parents throughout the society have also got to make it clear that their children are not there to be used as cannon fodder. And that statement is not hysterical hyperbole. It is a well documented fact that families are handing their children over to ISIS to become 'soldiers'. It is a sick and disgusting trend that makes the battlefield that much worse. How does one fight against child soldiers, after all?
If the good upright people in these groups are not willing to take a hard and fast stand, to make it known with no doubt whatsoever that the behavior will not be tolerated to any degree, the battle will be lost before it's begun. Only Muslims can make the fundamental change within the Muslim community that is required for it to be effective.
If they are not willing, if they will not take charge and take back the hearts, minds and souls of their children and brothers and sisters, then my position stands as it did yesterday. Round them all up - the good, the bad and the ugly - and send all of them back to where they came from so they can fight and kill and live or die by the rules they are willing to tolerate.
The alternative is that Western culture disappears under a burqa. Women who now live free and independent become less than sheep and goats on the social scale. All of us will lose our rights and our liberty.
Take your pick because it is glaringly apparent there is no middle road in this fight.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
Showing posts with label Muslims. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Muslims. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Brussels In Mourning
This morning I woke up and joined most of the rest of the world in watching the terrible news out of Belgium. This event and what led up to it infuriates me so I'm going to say what I think - no holds barred. Therefore, fair warning:
Do not read on if you're 'squishy' or 'squeamish' because I am going to say what's on my mind, and what's on my mind may scare the children.
First off, I do not advocate hurting people for any reason. I don't even like watching people 'fighting' for entertainment so my television does not project images of boxing or cage fighting or even wrestling - it's disgusting to me.
However, if you are in a situation of low-level war, which we are as proved by Paris and San Bernardino and Brussels this morning, and if you have to get information from someone who is under suspicion of planning or participating in a terrorist act, there are plenty of options available that don't cause long-term harm.
There's water boarding, to which we subject our own special forces people as part of their training. It's terror inducing but if done correctly causes no long-term harm. There's sleep deprivation which is useful if you have the time to get it to work, and drugs that are effective if time matters. Any of these options can be used to gather information that might solve or help prevent a tragedy like this morning's. Using those methods, or instilling the fear of their use in someone who's planning to do harm to others just going about their business is perfectly all right with me. If you don't want to be water boarded, don't be stupid. Don't get involved with stuff that's bad. Easy-peasy.
With that said, the massacre in Paris happened just four months ago. Since then the Belgian authorities and anyone else with half-a-brain have known that there are still nests of vipers inside the EU. Within a few days after those attacks, Europol had tracked the vermin back to Brussels but no farther, so it was pretty clear that they had holed up there.
Since there is a large Muslim community in the Molenbeek neighborhood of Brussels, which is where Salah Abdeslam of those Paris attacks was found last week, and since no one within that community has cooperated with authorities by talking, that's a rather telling sign.
I say that 'no one has cooperated' because if someone had it would not have taken four months for authorities to find the little weasel living in the midst of that neighborhood. If someone had cooperated, they would have found this guy within days after the Bataclan massacre. If people in that neighborhood are cooperative, they would have given intel to authorities last week or even yesterday that might have prevented this morning's attacks.
Obviously, that Muslim community is not cooperating. Obviously they have some agenda that does not mesh with Western ideas or culture. Obviously they, and yes, I do mean all of them because there is no evidence to the contrary, do not condemn the act of murder. They might not condone it, but neither have they condemned it or someone would have spoken up and told authorities where they could find these people.
If just one person who knew something had spoken up early last November, Paris wouldn't have happened.
If just one person who knew something was being planned had spoken up even yesterday, today's attacks could have been stopped.
So, no. I don't believe that the citizens of Molenbeek care about the non-Muslim population of Europe.
At this point, given that attitude of not caring and not cooperating with the authorities who are trying to keep everyone safe, a heavy line has been drawn.
To the Muslims in Molenbeek, and probably elsewhere throughout Europe and America, the attitude is that 'We live within your borders but we are not bound by your laws or rules of society'.
For confirmation of that attitude, look at the Shar'ia courts that have sprung up around the EU. That then falls straight into 'We will do as we please and the hell with everyone not of our faith. You are a non-believer and worth less than the dirt under my feet'.
That's obviously the attitude. If it isn't, why did no one come forward with information about these vermin either before or after Paris or during the planning of today's attack? Does anyone really believe that no one in that neighborhood heard or saw anything?
No doubt what I'll say next will brand me as some sort of 'phobe' or hater, but after the past months of silence from the citizens living in Molenbeek followed by this morning's decimation of innocent people doing nothing more than going about their business, I don't care.
Given the clear attitude of 'you v. us', Christian or Jew or secularist v. Muslim in this case, I think Belgium and other countries would be absolutely within their rights to round all of those people up. Gather all of them together - no harm, no punishment except expulsion. Purge them from Europe by shipping them back to wherever they or their antecedents came from - regardless of where they were born because it is as plain as day where their loyalties fall and it is clearly not with their native or adopted country.
Despite the stonewalling by the Muslim community in Brussels, authorities finally caught the little vermin Salah Abdeslam last Friday, and have been questioning him since his arrest. Given that he is a known chicken and has been spilling his guts, how did they not get information about this attack before it took place?
He's proved that he's a coward. He was positioned to martyr himself, but he chose to run instead of to blow himself up.
I just have to shake my head because, obviously, the Belgian / Europol investigative and interrogation methods are less than effective. There is no stomach for taking hard measures to prevent his from happening again. So it will. Maybe not tomorrow or next week, but it is only a matter of time because we're too soft.
And the Muslim community is not helping. They are not proving, by providing hard information that could prevent these things, that they care.
Lip service is useless and we're not even getting that from the majority of Muslims. It's not on the news and I'm constantly looking at the headlines because it's what I do.
It's not being proclaimed far and wide across the airwaves in public service ads.
It's not preventing anything, so don't lecture me about how wrong I am. Actions speak louder than words and silence is louder still and right now, the silence from the Muslim community at large is deafening.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
Do not read on if you're 'squishy' or 'squeamish' because I am going to say what's on my mind, and what's on my mind may scare the children.
First off, I do not advocate hurting people for any reason. I don't even like watching people 'fighting' for entertainment so my television does not project images of boxing or cage fighting or even wrestling - it's disgusting to me.
However, if you are in a situation of low-level war, which we are as proved by Paris and San Bernardino and Brussels this morning, and if you have to get information from someone who is under suspicion of planning or participating in a terrorist act, there are plenty of options available that don't cause long-term harm.
There's water boarding, to which we subject our own special forces people as part of their training. It's terror inducing but if done correctly causes no long-term harm. There's sleep deprivation which is useful if you have the time to get it to work, and drugs that are effective if time matters. Any of these options can be used to gather information that might solve or help prevent a tragedy like this morning's. Using those methods, or instilling the fear of their use in someone who's planning to do harm to others just going about their business is perfectly all right with me. If you don't want to be water boarded, don't be stupid. Don't get involved with stuff that's bad. Easy-peasy.
With that said, the massacre in Paris happened just four months ago. Since then the Belgian authorities and anyone else with half-a-brain have known that there are still nests of vipers inside the EU. Within a few days after those attacks, Europol had tracked the vermin back to Brussels but no farther, so it was pretty clear that they had holed up there.
Since there is a large Muslim community in the Molenbeek neighborhood of Brussels, which is where Salah Abdeslam of those Paris attacks was found last week, and since no one within that community has cooperated with authorities by talking, that's a rather telling sign.
I say that 'no one has cooperated' because if someone had it would not have taken four months for authorities to find the little weasel living in the midst of that neighborhood. If someone had cooperated, they would have found this guy within days after the Bataclan massacre. If people in that neighborhood are cooperative, they would have given intel to authorities last week or even yesterday that might have prevented this morning's attacks.
Obviously, that Muslim community is not cooperating. Obviously they have some agenda that does not mesh with Western ideas or culture. Obviously they, and yes, I do mean all of them because there is no evidence to the contrary, do not condemn the act of murder. They might not condone it, but neither have they condemned it or someone would have spoken up and told authorities where they could find these people.
If just one person who knew something had spoken up early last November, Paris wouldn't have happened.
If just one person who knew something was being planned had spoken up even yesterday, today's attacks could have been stopped.
So, no. I don't believe that the citizens of Molenbeek care about the non-Muslim population of Europe.
At this point, given that attitude of not caring and not cooperating with the authorities who are trying to keep everyone safe, a heavy line has been drawn.
To the Muslims in Molenbeek, and probably elsewhere throughout Europe and America, the attitude is that 'We live within your borders but we are not bound by your laws or rules of society'.
For confirmation of that attitude, look at the Shar'ia courts that have sprung up around the EU. That then falls straight into 'We will do as we please and the hell with everyone not of our faith. You are a non-believer and worth less than the dirt under my feet'.
That's obviously the attitude. If it isn't, why did no one come forward with information about these vermin either before or after Paris or during the planning of today's attack? Does anyone really believe that no one in that neighborhood heard or saw anything?
No doubt what I'll say next will brand me as some sort of 'phobe' or hater, but after the past months of silence from the citizens living in Molenbeek followed by this morning's decimation of innocent people doing nothing more than going about their business, I don't care.
Given the clear attitude of 'you v. us', Christian or Jew or secularist v. Muslim in this case, I think Belgium and other countries would be absolutely within their rights to round all of those people up. Gather all of them together - no harm, no punishment except expulsion. Purge them from Europe by shipping them back to wherever they or their antecedents came from - regardless of where they were born because it is as plain as day where their loyalties fall and it is clearly not with their native or adopted country.
Despite the stonewalling by the Muslim community in Brussels, authorities finally caught the little vermin Salah Abdeslam last Friday, and have been questioning him since his arrest. Given that he is a known chicken and has been spilling his guts, how did they not get information about this attack before it took place?
He's proved that he's a coward. He was positioned to martyr himself, but he chose to run instead of to blow himself up.
I just have to shake my head because, obviously, the Belgian / Europol investigative and interrogation methods are less than effective. There is no stomach for taking hard measures to prevent his from happening again. So it will. Maybe not tomorrow or next week, but it is only a matter of time because we're too soft.
And the Muslim community is not helping. They are not proving, by providing hard information that could prevent these things, that they care.
Lip service is useless and we're not even getting that from the majority of Muslims. It's not on the news and I'm constantly looking at the headlines because it's what I do.
It's not being proclaimed far and wide across the airwaves in public service ads.
It's not preventing anything, so don't lecture me about how wrong I am. Actions speak louder than words and silence is louder still and right now, the silence from the Muslim community at large is deafening.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
Friday, March 18, 2016
Why is Donald Trump so scary?
It seems that everyone who is talking about him is afraid of Donald Trump - of what he says and what they think he'll do.
Why? It's simple: He represents change.
Americans have been crying out for change for years. Every poll about Congressional approval shows that more than half the population thinks Congress sucks. Still, they go out and vote for their same Congressional representatives every election because it's the 'other guy' who's the problem. Every poll about the President's job performance is just as bad but we re-elected Obie-One despite the problems of his first term.
No one who is outside of Washington likes what's going on inside Washington because it is not doing well for us out here, outside the Beltway. But we still don't really want change. Not even when we're not happy.
So here we have a catalyst for change. For big changes if you listen to what the man is talking about.
Renegotiating trade deals. Changing our medical system so that we have real portability and more control over our medical care and decisions. Keeping us safer. Moving control of and decisions about our children's education from Washington back to the neighborhoods, where it belongs.
There are a lot of changes he's talking about and those changes are big and sweeping and it's why many Americans are 'scared' by him. Or offended, but that's a different subject.
Most people don't like or do well with change even though it can be good for us in the long run. We like ruts. We like routine and same-old, same-old and Donald is anything but same-old, same-old.
In him we have a candidate for president who is successful, powerful in his own way, outspoken and absolutely unlike what we're used to. He's full of bluff and bluster, a 'his bark is worse than his bite' kind of guy. But I don't think any of that is who the man really is. I think what we see during his rallies and debates is an outer persona - the bigger-than-life figure. When I watch interviews with him, that bluff and bluster is absent. He's calm and rational and thoughtful. But that doesn't get replayed again and again and again because it's not as exciting as those moments of outrageous behavior.
Personally I suspect (believe) the private man is far less outrageous, far more introspective and contained in private - within a small group with whom he's comfortable. I say that because The Donald reminds me of someone I worked with for many years.
The man I worked with was someone who had to deal with the political realities associated with his position at a northern California water district. During the 1970's drought, he was blamed and vilified for everything from the lack of rainfall to the rationing enforced on the residents. It got so bad he was to appear at a public hearing and the tension was so high in the room that as soon as his name was announced as the next speaker, the crowd became restless and many began to boo. This man walked up to the front of the room, holding both hands in the air, flipping a double-bird. Not exactly a politic moment - but it worked. It defused the situation because it was so unexpected. The crowd relaxed, laughed and the meeting went on. In the end he didn't do anything but what this man did in situations like that - and I see the same kind of thing in Trump.
Still, we are scared because we are used to all the other candidates who parse their words, picking and choosing them in careful manner. Politicians all take great care not to frighten the people whose votes they want. One of the reasons Rubio and Kasich come across as rehearsed is because they are - they have been taught not to make waves, not to stir the pot.
Trump, on the other hand, says what a lot of us think but don't have the courage or platform to say. They're so accustomed to 'vanilla' niceness that they can't get over the presence of someone who says what's on his mind.
Me? I find it refreshing. It's like a quick dip in a cold pool on a blistering day refreshing. Yes, it makes body parts pucker at first but then, once it sinks in, it's validating.
Aside from that bluntness that many find disturbing is the fact that my brain doesn't screech to a halt at the first obstacle. It seems that a lot of people have their mental clutch slip, catch and seize up when he says something outrageous.
What I see is that most of those outrageous declarations are in the heat of the moment when he's gotten carried away by something. As soon as the thunder passes and he realizes that what he said was ridiculous, he'll walk it back.
Is that a good thing? Yes and no.
Yes because I like the intellectual honesty of someone who can admit when they were wrong. No, because it leads to misunderstanding and fear.
What's different is that a lot of (most) politicians occasionally say stupid things but they don't have the courage to do so. They'll dig in their heels and refuse to admit they were wrong.
That is the big difference that I see between Trump and the others. He doesn't fight the tide like most other pols when he's wrong. Instead, he owns it. Perhaps not 100% as in 'I was wrong', but at least he has the courage to back away from, restate or rephrase which is more than can be said of the vast majority of other long term pols.
What outrages people is often not what he's said. It's what has been perceived that he has said. For instance, that declaration he made about banning Muslims and the fact that it has taken root and sprouted among some. They think, because they weren't paying attention, that Trump wants to ban all Muslims from America forever.
That is not what he said, though. What he did say is that he wants a ban until we know what we're doing. It's not about Muslims or anyone else. It is about us - how we screen people who want to come into the country.
The problem is that the left and the media aren't honest. They don't point out that missing phrase that he spoke: 'until we know what we're doing' That is what the man said in the breath after saying 'ban Muslims'.
And it's easy to understand why someone would say that if you look at how we 'screen' visa applicants. Put generously, the questions on the entry application appear to have been written by a backward three year old and I am not even beginning to make fun of this because it is so serious.
Take a look at this screenshot from the website linked below:
http://www.immihelp.com/visitor-visa/visitors-visa-interview-sample-questions-answers.html
Take a close look at the third question in that list - which you can find if you follow the link provided.
Now, I'm sorry but is that a serious question? Is this how we're screening out potential terrorists? By asking them 'Are you coming here to kill us?'
Yeah, sure. I can just see some ISIS dude sitting across the desk from the embassy wonk, all decked out in his terrorist regalia being asked that question and answering, 'Yes'.
With immigration 'background checks' like that one - what is the point? We might as well airlift known ISIS fighters into the country - or fly them into Mexico and they can walk across our wide open border all by themselves.
This is what led Trump to say we need to ban Muslims - not because he doesn't like Muslims, but because there is a known group of them ready, willing and wanting to do us harm.
There are any other number of stupid statements made by the man, but they can't even begin to be taken seriously by anyone with half a brain. Not unless everyone else in this country can stand up and categorically state that they haven't, at some point in their lives, made some insupportable declaration of 'fact'.
Bear in mind, actions speak louder than words. The fact that he is honest enough to walk back stupid statements tells me his heart is in the right place and that the declaration was spur of the moment rather than an intractable position. He is not a practiced politician. He is a newbie in this realm so hasn't had the training the professionals have had - and I still say that's a good thing.
I hope that when the time comes, and when the inevitable is made clear to the knuckleheaded power-brokers inside Washington that The People want The Donald, those knuckleheads and their media minions will STFU and back him. I think, and there seem to be a growing number of smart people who think that he will do just fine for us.
I hope so anyway.
Now, it's a beautiful spring day outside and I think I'll go for a walk.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
Why? It's simple: He represents change.
Americans have been crying out for change for years. Every poll about Congressional approval shows that more than half the population thinks Congress sucks. Still, they go out and vote for their same Congressional representatives every election because it's the 'other guy' who's the problem. Every poll about the President's job performance is just as bad but we re-elected Obie-One despite the problems of his first term.
No one who is outside of Washington likes what's going on inside Washington because it is not doing well for us out here, outside the Beltway. But we still don't really want change. Not even when we're not happy.
So here we have a catalyst for change. For big changes if you listen to what the man is talking about.
Renegotiating trade deals. Changing our medical system so that we have real portability and more control over our medical care and decisions. Keeping us safer. Moving control of and decisions about our children's education from Washington back to the neighborhoods, where it belongs.
There are a lot of changes he's talking about and those changes are big and sweeping and it's why many Americans are 'scared' by him. Or offended, but that's a different subject.
Most people don't like or do well with change even though it can be good for us in the long run. We like ruts. We like routine and same-old, same-old and Donald is anything but same-old, same-old.
In him we have a candidate for president who is successful, powerful in his own way, outspoken and absolutely unlike what we're used to. He's full of bluff and bluster, a 'his bark is worse than his bite' kind of guy. But I don't think any of that is who the man really is. I think what we see during his rallies and debates is an outer persona - the bigger-than-life figure. When I watch interviews with him, that bluff and bluster is absent. He's calm and rational and thoughtful. But that doesn't get replayed again and again and again because it's not as exciting as those moments of outrageous behavior.
Personally I suspect (believe) the private man is far less outrageous, far more introspective and contained in private - within a small group with whom he's comfortable. I say that because The Donald reminds me of someone I worked with for many years.
The man I worked with was someone who had to deal with the political realities associated with his position at a northern California water district. During the 1970's drought, he was blamed and vilified for everything from the lack of rainfall to the rationing enforced on the residents. It got so bad he was to appear at a public hearing and the tension was so high in the room that as soon as his name was announced as the next speaker, the crowd became restless and many began to boo. This man walked up to the front of the room, holding both hands in the air, flipping a double-bird. Not exactly a politic moment - but it worked. It defused the situation because it was so unexpected. The crowd relaxed, laughed and the meeting went on. In the end he didn't do anything but what this man did in situations like that - and I see the same kind of thing in Trump.
Still, we are scared because we are used to all the other candidates who parse their words, picking and choosing them in careful manner. Politicians all take great care not to frighten the people whose votes they want. One of the reasons Rubio and Kasich come across as rehearsed is because they are - they have been taught not to make waves, not to stir the pot.
Trump, on the other hand, says what a lot of us think but don't have the courage or platform to say. They're so accustomed to 'vanilla' niceness that they can't get over the presence of someone who says what's on his mind.
Me? I find it refreshing. It's like a quick dip in a cold pool on a blistering day refreshing. Yes, it makes body parts pucker at first but then, once it sinks in, it's validating.
Aside from that bluntness that many find disturbing is the fact that my brain doesn't screech to a halt at the first obstacle. It seems that a lot of people have their mental clutch slip, catch and seize up when he says something outrageous.
What I see is that most of those outrageous declarations are in the heat of the moment when he's gotten carried away by something. As soon as the thunder passes and he realizes that what he said was ridiculous, he'll walk it back.
Is that a good thing? Yes and no.
Yes because I like the intellectual honesty of someone who can admit when they were wrong. No, because it leads to misunderstanding and fear.
What's different is that a lot of (most) politicians occasionally say stupid things but they don't have the courage to do so. They'll dig in their heels and refuse to admit they were wrong.
That is the big difference that I see between Trump and the others. He doesn't fight the tide like most other pols when he's wrong. Instead, he owns it. Perhaps not 100% as in 'I was wrong', but at least he has the courage to back away from, restate or rephrase which is more than can be said of the vast majority of other long term pols.
What outrages people is often not what he's said. It's what has been perceived that he has said. For instance, that declaration he made about banning Muslims and the fact that it has taken root and sprouted among some. They think, because they weren't paying attention, that Trump wants to ban all Muslims from America forever.
That is not what he said, though. What he did say is that he wants a ban until we know what we're doing. It's not about Muslims or anyone else. It is about us - how we screen people who want to come into the country.
The problem is that the left and the media aren't honest. They don't point out that missing phrase that he spoke: 'until we know what we're doing' That is what the man said in the breath after saying 'ban Muslims'.
And it's easy to understand why someone would say that if you look at how we 'screen' visa applicants. Put generously, the questions on the entry application appear to have been written by a backward three year old and I am not even beginning to make fun of this because it is so serious.
Take a look at this screenshot from the website linked below:
http://www.immihelp.com/visitor-visa/visitors-visa-interview-sample-questions-answers.html
Take a close look at the third question in that list - which you can find if you follow the link provided.
Now, I'm sorry but is that a serious question? Is this how we're screening out potential terrorists? By asking them 'Are you coming here to kill us?'
Yeah, sure. I can just see some ISIS dude sitting across the desk from the embassy wonk, all decked out in his terrorist regalia being asked that question and answering, 'Yes'.
With immigration 'background checks' like that one - what is the point? We might as well airlift known ISIS fighters into the country - or fly them into Mexico and they can walk across our wide open border all by themselves.
This is what led Trump to say we need to ban Muslims - not because he doesn't like Muslims, but because there is a known group of them ready, willing and wanting to do us harm.
There are any other number of stupid statements made by the man, but they can't even begin to be taken seriously by anyone with half a brain. Not unless everyone else in this country can stand up and categorically state that they haven't, at some point in their lives, made some insupportable declaration of 'fact'.
Bear in mind, actions speak louder than words. The fact that he is honest enough to walk back stupid statements tells me his heart is in the right place and that the declaration was spur of the moment rather than an intractable position. He is not a practiced politician. He is a newbie in this realm so hasn't had the training the professionals have had - and I still say that's a good thing.
I hope that when the time comes, and when the inevitable is made clear to the knuckleheaded power-brokers inside Washington that The People want The Donald, those knuckleheads and their media minions will STFU and back him. I think, and there seem to be a growing number of smart people who think that he will do just fine for us.
I hope so anyway.
Now, it's a beautiful spring day outside and I think I'll go for a walk.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)