* I like how obtuse opponents are by focusing on a wall as if that is the only component to fighting the problem. If the political will ever comes about to adequately secure the southern border with proper fencing, then there most surely will be the political will to allow agents to conduct frequent workplace raids and deport those who overstayed a visa. Additionally such policies would also include not allowing illegals to open bank accounts and be issued with photo IDs or driver’s licenses. The wall/fence is just one component. By itself it won’t be highly effective, but in combination with the above it should make a noticeable difference.
* Michael Savage made the point today that Italians in the New York city police department worked against the Mafia in order that they would not have to live in the corrupt society that they left behind in Italy. Monitoring Italian neighborhoods did not alienate the typical Italian immigrant, they favored it. Thus, very plausibly, Cruz’s policy of monitoring Muslim neighborhoods would not lead to increased jihadism by Muslim – Americans. It’s a policy that would be favored by everyone not politically motivated.
COMMENTS:
* …how high does the wall have to be to keep the Internet out?”
The Internet can’t plant a bomb in an airport or shoot into a crowd of people at a concert. Muslims can rant for all they’re worth on Facebook if they’re at a safe distance from us in Syria or Morocco.
She’s again illustrating the choice we have when it comes to immigration. You can have tight controls of prospective immigrants, with intrusive probing of their private lives to see if they’re suitable candidates. You can also have blanket bans on races or religions who will never fit in. This will allow you to have a society with minimal surveillance of the citizens by the government (the libertarians’ ideal). On the other hand, you can have a laissez-faire immigration system combined with a police state to keep track of all the dangerous people (or their descendants) whose presence is the fruit your open-borders policy. You have to pick one or other of these combinations.
* There’s a certain logic to this madness.
Let’s say you’re a domestic company that receives nationals security-related contracts from the federal govt. The more Muslims enter the US, the more terrorism occurs. The more terrorism occurs, the more justification there is for your services.
Many of these contractors tend to donate very generously to our politicians, such as Hillary. They donate to political campaigns and also offer lucrative lobbyist jobs to retired politicians and military personnel. If she proposes more surveillance and more Muslim immigration, that benefits her contributors.
There’s another group of people who benefit. That group would be the “Deep State.” The more terrorism occurs in the US, the more of need there is for their. They’re invested in maintaining the system.
Of course, the system might have opponents. Let’s say you are an opponent. You’d be a very popular target for surveillance by a security contractor or intelligence operatives. If they found anything incriminating, they could easily blackmail you. Knowing Hillary, I bet there are lot of powerful people with a lot of dirt on her.
It’s not that mysterious why so many politicians, media figures, and other powerful individuals are so invested in Muslim immigration and domestic surveillance. It’s also not mysterious why they’re so invested in continued conflict overseas. This is why the “War on Terror” can never be won.
* The Wall connects thoughts to reality. Once one sees the sense of it, the thought propagates to other implementations. Ideas that there are things that differ in the world, and cell membranes. It counters the Floyd mush think.
* The Muzzies are just getting warmed up, if you look at their attacks, they are clearly evolving in terms of sophistication and targeting. This ought to scare the bright green piss out of folks.
Several years from now I suspect they will move onto infrastructure targets which will give them a massive return on investment. Read Matt Bracken’s latest article to get a feel.
Even if it’s not the scale he predicts, say they just take out the power grid that keeps the lights on and water flowing in Manhattan or D.C. by blowing up the critical transformers that keep the lights out for weeks or months. There goes the stock market and trillions in stock value, not to mention making these places unlivable.
Remember how they panicked over the Beltway Sniper(who were Muslims)? This would a 100x worse.
Modern civilization is very fragile, especially the cities.
Palo Alto, Greenwich, Aspen, Telluride won’t be safe, it’s just a fat juicy target loaded with men-boy geeks living in palatial estates guarded by rent-a-cops. Those palaces just say “hit me”.
* Mohammedan street crime is increasingly impacting formerly low-crime European countries. Get tough on crime initiatives are largely driven by NAM crime. I guess the short version is diversity or freedom, pick one.
* Listening to a few NPR programs this morning, I heard from a number of experts that Islamophobia is a barrier to dealing with terrorism. Me, I think Racismphobia is the real barrier.
