Previous Post
Next Post

Speaking on NPR’s Morning Edition, career foreign service officer and former acting undersecretary for arms control Tom Countryman (above) explained why President Trump’s temporary travel ban is dangerously wrong-headed.

According to the ex-career civil servant, the ban signals the world that the U.S. is at war with Islam (i.e. all Muslims). Radical Islamic terrorists (or whatever Mr. Countryman called them) will capitalize on America’s religious intolerance  to recruit more proto-terrorists. All of which makes America less safe.

The idea that President Trump’s Executive Order would “radicalize” susceptible Muslims is patently ridiculous. It assumes that potential recruits saw America as a bright shining beacon of freedom and tolerance — until Trump’s temporary immigration ban turned them to the “dark side.”

Tens of millions of Muslims already consider America The Great Satan. Progressives portraying the Executive Order as a terrorist recruitment tool fail to appreciate that our enemies are hardly struggling to find reasons to hate the U.S.A. and the Jewish and Christian inhabitants therein. The latest debauched Hollywood film provides plenty of grist for their death cult mill.

Bottom line: radical Islam seeks our destruction, regardless of what we say or do.

This delusion — that America’s “failure” to live up to its professed virtues encourages terrorism — is the same sort of affliction found amongst Americans promoting gun control. Gun control advocates consider violent criminals are mistreated, misguided, disadvantaged individuals, created by society. Armed criminals can be “convinced” to abandon their violent ways through preventive social programs or the elimination of “easy access” to firearms.

We lock our doors to dangerous criminals. America’s new immigration policy locks our country’s doors to potential terrorists. We check out unknown visitors before opening our doors, The Trump administration is seeking to create more effective ways to screen people who want to live amongst us. What’s wrong with that?

Most Americans support Trump’s temporary immigration ban — for the same reason most Americans oppose gun control. Practical problems require practical solutions.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Here’s a random thought(s):

    On “day one” Trump was going to overturn Obama’s illegal immigrant amnesty signed by Obama. On “day one” Trump was going to end the “dreamers act” executive order.


    Or do we care only about Trump action to overturn every gun restriction on the books?

    • Imagine the idiocy of someone implying that Trump isn’t living up to his promises or doing enough after two weeks, when has already put in motion half of his agenda and not done one thing out of step with what he talked about.

      • Trump said, “Day one….”. Presidents prioritize things to suit their agenda. Talk is cheap. It would be appropriate for Trump to explain to the public why he has not yet accomplished everything he claimed for “Day one.” A simple, “It is just a bit more complex than it appeared, but I have directed a solution be ready for my signature by (fill-in the date). It is not ‘Day one.’, but it is as close as possible given the circumstance. Yes, I want a daily accounting of where Trump is in accomplishing his ‘first 100 days’ agenda. I am not one of those right wing sycophants who gives my candidate a pass simply because he is my candidate. Elections have consequences, the primary of which is fulfilling campaign promises. IOUs must be paid.

  2. It’s one of those things that sounds good on paper. However I think the order was poorly executed. For something that affects so many people it seems like they should have taken their time in crafting a clearer order with good words. Like the best words.

    • This may be unfolding just the way “the Donald” wants. We do not know specifically how Trump described his desired outcome to those who wrote the actual order.

      • LMAO, This sounds like the ol’ ‘God Works In Mysterious Ways’ nonsense used to sweep logical conflicts under the rug.

        • Now that’s a reach. What I said, re-phrased, is we don’t know the original specifications against which to grade the outcome. Nothing mysterious there. Staff work is often sub-optimal. So, did Rudy screw it up, or did “the Donald” actually order things exactly as they unfolded? Then the question is, if chaos was the intent, what was the purpose – how does that chaos elevate public safety (or anti-terrorism)?

    • Yes tell every progtard and islamist terr in the world at least 15 working days in advance. Have the marxist media and demtard party wetting themselves is an unfortunate result of the improperly staffed order. Too fricking bad.

    • Simple logic. If you find yourself in a hole, STOP DIGGING!

      The first exercise for Trump is to stop enlarging the hole Obama left for him/us. Step two is to figure out how to climb out of the hole.

    • It should have said “The US border is closed for all immigrants for the span of 50 years. If you want to leave, go ahead. But no one from any other nation has any right to live in the US. Next we will start the deportations.”

  3. I feel a really important question is how do we go about getting rid of such useless deadwood from all levels of bureaucracy? Yeah, the top levels will be replaced by political appointments, but how about the mid-level hacks who would have never been hired by a competent administration?

    • The Executive gives them a direct order and when they fail to comply you have grounds to fire their useless progtard butts.

      OTHERWISE there is NO other way you will never get rid of the trash (8yr of Barry and most 8yrs of BilllyBob admins)

      • “The Executive gives them a direct order and when they fail to comply you have grounds to fire their useless progtard butts. ”

        Have you reviewed, lately, the mountain of obstacles in front of firing a career government employee? Kinda starts by having to prove a negative. Real case follows:
        Employee ran a construction business from his phone in a major government department. He has his issued smart phone, and two others, on him all the time. When not in meetings, this employee was constantly on the phone managing his construction crews, creditors and attorneys. Eventually, the group supervisor did an official contact to warn the employee that he was violating federal law using government property and time to pursue a private business. The behavior continued, unabated. The next step was a written warning, detailing the infractions. Soon, the union rep met with the supervisor and demanded records of all the employees who used any government property or time to conduct personal business. Along with the listing, the union rep demanded records of all the people who were counseled, orally and in writing. There were no such records. The union rep informed the supervisor that without being able to prove that the problem employee was not being treated any differently than other employees, no disciplinary action could be taken. The department HR and legal folks informed the supervisor that the union rep was correct. When the supervisor said that no other employees were running a business on the premises, the response was that if even one employee made a personal call on department time, and was not counseled, then the problem employee has several legal remedies that could target the supervisor. Since the supervisor could not document all the times that the rest of the employees WERE NOT making improper use of government property and time, her case was useless. Disciplinary action was abandoned, and the written reprimand removed from the bad employee’s personnel file.

        The president can only remove, with or without cause, those people in government we were/are direct presidential appointees.

          • The employment system was not created by unions (per se), but is called the “civil service system”, which is replete with rules to ensure a “merti-based” personnel system. Unions have supplemental rules, but the adjudication process is strictly a federal creature. The union rep, in the matter I explained, was actually doing the supervisor a favor by revealing the complexity of the disciplinary system, which was verified by the HR department. In at least this one instance, the union was not being obstructionist.

  4. 911 Hijackers:

    15 from Saudi Arabia
    2 from United Arab Emirates
    1 from Egypt
    1 from Lebanon

    How many of those countries are included in the ban?

    I agree we shouldn’t let tens of thousands of unvetted Syrian refugees come pouring into this country. But let’s call this travel ban what it is – cherrypicking.

    If this was really about keeping potential terrorists out, Saudi Arabia would be included in the list. They have as many radicals who hate us as any other country. But they own 11% of our economy, and we wouldn’t want to upset the money.

    • My take has been that we have effective intel and/or “cooperation” (in as much as we ever get from Saudi or Pakistan) in the countries not on the list and less the economics.

    • The nations listed on the travel ban were the ones named initially in March of 2011 under the Obama administration (and later in December 2015 with stricter restrictions), with congressional approval, as being terrorist hotbeds and nations of special concern, with attendant restrictions on travel. Many speculate that the reason Trump picked those specific nations is it would make it harder for the left to criticize his choices when the exact same list of nations was subjected to travel restrictions for the exact same reasons, by their own party. Of course, expecting logical consistency form the left is often a fool’s errand, but that was likely the motivation for going with those specific nations.

      • As has been said, the people screaming that the order is racist, a muslim ban, are the same people complaining that Saudi, Egypt and others ARE NOT on the list. With the Left, you cannot act in an acceptable manner.

    • The link provided all the usual leftie, whinny, liberal claptrap. First, the order is not a ban. If it were, all muslim countries would have been listed. Second, there is no constitutional right for any non-citizen to be in this country, or even visit. The liberal courts view the constitution as the classic suicide pact wherein this culture must allow itself to be destroyed because common sense is not a constitutional provision. I do not note much of an outcry from any source over Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus, not of his orders requiring opposition news outlets to be shut down, and owners/editors jailed (subject to military tribunals). The constitution also grants virtually unlimited power to the president in defense of the nation.

      • “The link provided all the usual leftie, whinny, liberal claptrap.”

        Actually, this link was atypical of the left. It had references and facts, not just feelings.

        “First, the order is not a ban. If it were, all muslim countries would have been listed.”

        I agreed 100%, but what do we do with Giuliani’s statement? Although I’ve not been a fan of his, I’ve not ever considered him a liar.

        “Second, there is no constitutional right for any non-citizen to be in this country, or even visit”.

        You either didn’t read the article completely or you refuse to accept precedent case law. Our constitution covers everyone on our soil. And, if you believe some followed and referenced case law, maybe people off our soil.

        “The liberal courts view the constitution as the classic suicide pact wherein this culture must allow itself to be destroyed because common sense is not a constitutional provision.”

        While I do agree that common sense is mostly missing these days, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to think anyone considers our Constitution a “suicide pact.” We can protect ourselves without shredding any portion of.

        “I do not note much of an outcry from any source over Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus, not of his orders requiring opposition news outlets to be shut down, and owners/editors jailed (subject to military tribunals).”

        I suppose if Lincoln were alive and kicking today that might be a valid argument, but this reeks of the same petulant finger pointing we all tend to go down from time to time in dealing with these issues. “He did it too.” is not a valid response. “But some bad people slipped through before” is not a valid argument. We have someone in charge who is (probably) breaking laws RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW the action needs to be dealt with.

        “The constitution also grants virtually unlimited power to the president in defense of the nation.”

        No, it doesn’t. The constitution is there to LIMIT the power of the Government / President in all actions. A president cannot stop you from speaking out against him, going to a church he doesn’t like, or violate your eighth (or any other) amendment protected rights in defense of this nation.

        I disagree wholeheartedly with Islam. I believe “them” to be a danger as a whole. I believe in the Sovereignty of our nation and borders. I just believe portions of this action by President Trump are wrong. We are, as a nation, smart enough and mature enough to be right in everything we do.

        • “No, it doesn’t. The constitution is there to LIMIT the power of the Government / President in all actions. A president cannot stop you from speaking out against him, going to a church he doesn’t like, or violate your eighth (or any other) amendment protected rights in defense of this nation.”

          The president can declare martial law over the entire country as a means to put down rebellion. Do not think for a moment the founders wrote the document so that should the nation again face rebellion (as it did in 1860), the president (and the national government) must honor all the niceties and allow the country to be destroyed. You are thinking about the operation of the constitution in “peace time”. The idea that if there were a general rebellion, the president could not stifle “free speech” that supports the rebellion is not supportable. To think that the president could not put down a rebellion “by any means necessary” does, indeed, acquiesce to the notion that the constitution is, indeed, a suicide pact.

        • “Our constitution covers everyone on our soil. ”

          Yes it does. However, and a big “however”, absolutely no non-citizen has the legal or moral right to be here if they are not citizens. That is, the constitution is not a treaty with the world that provides for unlimited, unregulated travel into and out of the US. The constitution does not permit simply any warm body who pitches up on shore to come and go as they please. The constitution provides due process for everyone present, it does not provide open borders for the world. No human in east povertyville has a constitutional (or natural, civil, or human) right to flee poverty and enter the US unimpeded. Immigration is completely at the pleasure of the US. If the president declares that all immigration will cease, regardless of the person’s nationality, then all immigration can legally and constitutionally be terminated. Disposition of those already here is a matter of due process. Point is, immigration to the US is not an inalienable right for every person on the planet. Never was,

  5. If it really is a Muslim ban then they screwed up by not listing 9 of the 10 countries with the highest Muslim population. Must be a pretty badly worded ban to permit the majority of Muslim nations to avoid this ban…

    • You know the lefties and sob sisters are unhinged when they complain that the pause in immigration from certain countries is a “muslim ban”, and then complain that not every muslim country is listed.

  6. Well put RF…for a change. I had to suppress a guffaw when they trotted out “ex”(?) Chicago gangbangers in DC when asked about what to do about crime. Partners in crime with their democrat massa’s…akin to asking muslim murderers ANYTHING.

  7. Not to be overly technical here but “The Great Satan” comments, while often considered in the West to be a general feeling in the Islamic world, come mainly from Iran. Specifically speeches given by leaders of that country and generally speeches on foreign and domestic Iranian policy. The term, in it’s modern usage, originated with Ayatollah Khomeini and is pointedly political in it’s usage.

    The term has also been used by Iranian leadership to describe the U.K. and, IIRC Israel at various times. The former USSR also had the distinction of being “The Little Satan” for a time, another term that has been applied to various countries at different times depending on who the Iranian leadership was blaming for what.

    The terms have specific meanings in a Quranic context (in terms of the powers various demons have) but, as far as I can tell, are generally ignored outside certain circles in Iran. It’s used in Iran as a justification for their theocracy (keeping out the “The Great Satan” who has the power not only to seduce but also to kill and control people).

    I won’t say it has no usage outside Iran because I’m sure it does but generally speaking it’s a term used, in relation to the US, by Iranian leadership.

    As to those here who promote the nonsense covered in this story their motivations are not terribly complicated. They want to import a ton of people under circumstances that will make it difficult to get them out of here in the future. It’s all about letting people in and then using that as a justification for future action, action which in this case probably creates more Democrat voters. Terrorism concerns? Meh, these people are trying to move us to utopia. A few piles of dead bodies along the way don’t bother them and never have, after all we’re on the road to utopia! How can you be against utopia? Ends, means, justification and all that.

    Another level headed article.

  8. If you think this guy is crazy then read about the nut job libertarians at Reason Magazine, who agree with the socialist progressives and republican senator Lindsey Graham. They all say murders rapist and other criminals have every right to immigrate to America.

    I trust no one until they prove by actions and deeds they support liberty. William Weld, VP for the libertarian party and the idiot Gary Johnson are wonderful if you enjoy shooting up heroin in public legally. Yes I know, “you want to put things into your bodies.”
    I want to put and keep cold steel in my hands. Not a joint.

  9. Y’know, if there wasn’t a temporary travel ban, Muslims all over the world would just love us so much that they’d simply swoon at the very mention of the USA and join us in singing Kumbaya.

    No, really. They would.

  10. I would disagree that those in the Middle East hate us no matter what we do. I think they have a great deal to hate us for. Our government props up dictators all across their region, we’ve been complicit, if not in the lead of, over throwing regimes for nearly 100 years, were responsible for millions of deaths from military bombings to child starving sanctions, even when we weren’t “at war” in the region. Madilyn “I think I’ll convert to Muslim for solidarity” Albright said a half million starved Iraqi children were worth the sanctions on the Husaini regime, and that was in between the two Iraq wars. The 9-11 terrorists said why they did it and it wasn’t because of our freedoms or our blue jeans.

  11. “Let us in or we’ll kill you” is the least compelling immigration argument ever.

    Islam only cares about winning. Either you’re killing non-Muslims. Or you’re a loser. Muslim martyrs don’t die for their beliefs. They die while killing others for their beliefs.

    Daniel Greenfield

  12. “The idea that President Trump’s Executive Order would “radicalize” susceptible Muslims is patently ridiculous. It assumes that potential recruits saw America as a bright shining beacon of freedom and tolerance — until Trump’s temporary immigration ban turned them to the “dark side.””

    Rubbish. The second sentence exposes either ignorance or demagoguery.

    The problem is that there are millions of Muslims only irritated by the U.S. at this point, who could be tipped into active hostility by this move, not that it’s going to turn friends magically into enemies. That’s especially so because the list is obviously tailored to suit Trump’s personal interests rather than the interests of the U.S. — or Saudi Arabia would lead.

    • So the implication of you’re statements is that there is a group of people who, if we refuse to tell them into our country, will then want to harm our country?? “Let us in or we’re going to fuck your shit up” isn’t exactly a compelling argument in favor of letting someone in… is it?

      • Now you get it. Standards breed competition, rivalry and envy. If you do not allow people to harm you, or destroy your property, you are only fanning the flames. People denied the ability to act as they please become recruiting posters for others to hate that which denies them their heart’s desire. “Good” inflames “Evil”. Do not resist “Evil”, and you will be left peacefully alone.

  13. My understanding of the situation is that the background system of Iraq, Syria, Libya, and others listed (other than Iran) are in such shambles they cannot provide reliable information. We’ve dropped a lot of bombs on Iraq and Syria. Also ISIS, Trumps stated target, has their greatest presence in Iraq and Syria.

    Saudi Arabia and others can provide relative reliable background / vetting information.

    Also, the Left blames Trump for literally everything. It would be advantageous for ISIS, ISIL, Al Qaeda, et all to strike before Trump even has his cabinet ready.

    Regardless, another US attack is on the horizon, and Trump will surely be blamed.

    • A lot of us don’t do Facebook, it’s too hard to wade through the fake news, the snowflake tantrums, and the outright hatred for anyone who did not vote for HER!

  14. I oppose gun control, but I also hate this immigration order.

    Immigrants are already way more thoroughly vetted than people seem to realize.

    Stolen from a friend (who probably got it somewhere else):
    This is the pre-Trump vetting process for refugees. It’s about a 2 year process for people who have already been sitting in refugee camps for years:
    1. Registration, interviews, and refugee status needs to be granted first by the U.N.
    2. Referral from the U.N. to settle in the U.S. (as opposed to being referred to another country).
    3. Interview w/ State Department.
    4. 2 and sometimes 3 background checks.
    5. 3 finger printing screenings.
    6. U.S. Immigration HQ review (Syrians require 2 reviews).
    7. Interview with Homeland Security.
    8. Screening for contagious diseases.
    9. Cultural orientation class.
    10. Resettlement agency cross-checks.
    12. Final security check upon arrival in the U.S.

    He also pointed out that terrorist risks posed by refugees is minimal compared with other forms of entry into the United States.

    I also think it’s apropos to say that we don’t want to ban guns because someone might do something bad. We know someone will. We just think the pros outweight the cons. That’s how I feel about immigration. Surely some of them will be bad, but not enough to justify the cost to thousands upon thousands of lives that are on hold waiting for just the slim chance that coming here provides.

    • You are overlooking the fact that the vetting process depends on a nation having sufficient data to allow vetting. DHS and NSC people already declared we cannot vet the people from the countries listed on the order. The so-called refugees are from nations with poor public records, and a culture where anyone can name themselves anything they want, anytime they want.

      • That’s true but refugees from everywhere get out with no records. So it’s not an isolated problem. This is the reason the process takes so long. The process is designed more around people than records anyway as they are looking for changes in your story and such. Which granted doesn’t guarantee they’ll catch bad actors, but it helps.

        • Is there no difference between “process takes so long” and “we can’t vet these people”?

          And why is the vast majority of “refugees” found in the warrior age group? Why the absence of women and children? What happened to them? Are these refugees, or undocumented workers who intend to make more money than they can “at home”?

          Anyone who shows up here without a history, without a needed skill should be quarantined until they can be returned to their nation of origin. Not one American should be required to give up their lives for the sake of “feelz”.

      • Let me also say that I totally understand and respect support for all this, I just disagree. Terrorists are a real threat. And a nation (it can be argued) should be watching out for her citizens first.

  15. If it is your America to give away, it is my America to take away from you.

    Follow and uphold the law or go choke yourself.

    Not with my hand, your hand, lean into it.

  16. Other than for Syrians, it is a temporary ban (3 months for Visas and 4 months for immigration). Of course the AUMF and Patriot Acts were supposed to be of limited duration as well. We will see.

  17. Because we all know that the path to true knowledge is listening to opinions that confirm what you already believe.

  18. Security theater at it’s best, just like the TSA and gun free zones.
    A 4 month ban? On, what 7 countries? But not the Saudis?
    It won’t do shit to make anything safer (unless you feelz safer) and it won’t do anything to make things more dangerous.
    It’s a joke.

    • I’ve actually listened to NPR on a few occasions recently when I was on road trips and couldn’t find a good music station. I went into it expecting the same overt liberal bias and editorializing that is so ingrained in CNN and other MSM outlets. I was actually pleasantly surprised.

      While there is definitely some liberal bias, they do a pretty good job of presenting a balanced point of view. They always have commentators on both sides of every issue. I didn’t come away feeling like my head had been filled with one-sided propaganda. That’s a lot more than I can say after watching CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News.

  19. What a bunch of Radical Fanatical Right Wing Bull. Out of all of the Countries banned not one has killed an American since 1976 but the Countries NOT BANNED have killed roughly 3,000 Americans. Herr Trump did not ban them because he has huge business dealings with them and he also owns hotels in their Countries.

    Right Wing American Fanatics have gunned down far more Americans than the very few that were killed by people not born in this country with Dillon Roof their poster boy. Your chances of being killed by a non-American are several billion to one but try and walk down the streets of Chicago in broad daylight and see how safe it is. Yet the far Right Wing Fanatics brush this off with a wave of the hand. Their boogey man is anyone that is different racially or religiously. Its ok for Americans to kill thousands of Americans every year but the world is coming to an end if just one is killed by a non-citizen. AND NEVER MIND THAT FOR DECADES NOT ONE AMERICAN HAS BEEN MURDERED BY A REFUGEE BUT THEY TAKE THE HATE, THE BLAME AND THE JEALOUSY WHEN THEY START HUNDREDS OF SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES EVERY YEAR. GOOD GOD WE CANNOT LET THAT HAPPEN THE FAR RIGHT WILL SAY.

    There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world and the majority of them do not agree with mass murder as it is against their religion and they have stated this many times on European TV. On the Internet they have used the slogan “Not in my Name”. Radical Islam are not “real Muslims” in any sense of the word rather they are Thugs that have used religion as a method to seize power for more wealth much as the American Republican Greed Mongers and Religious Fanatics have seized power to destroy the Affordable Health Care Act to destroy it so the corrupt Insurance and Drug companies of which the Republicans are their Prostitutes can once again rape the American People and turn America into a Christian Caliphate that will be able to force “the Christian religion” on everyone in the U.S. and openly discriminate against anyone or any religion that is not Christian or follow Christian beliefs, exactly what the Founding Fathers feared most, a society at war with itself because of one religion trying to destroy another. Separation of Church and State is rejected by the Fanatical Far Right and everyone that is not Anglo Saxon White Protestant is not considered a “real American” and should be deported or gassed, Catholics included.


    In the U.S. many LEGAL Latino’s are converting to Islam even though they were formerly Christian because Some American Fake Christians (hypocrites) did not accept them or make them feel comfortable when communicating with them even though they are American citizens too.

    And today a Seattle Judge blocked Herr Trumps immigration (Muslim) ban.

    The ACLU got an astonishing 24 million in donations in just a couple of days when Herr Trumps pen started taking away the peoples Constitutional Rights. The donations were done because of mass panic when the public woke up to what was happening in America under the Jack Boot of Herr Trump and his gang of Nazi Thugs with Steve Bannon the reincarnation of Joseph Goebbels. Bannon makes Goebbels look like a kindly Left Wing minority lover.

    IN CONCLUSION; If you want to make America Great Again let in more Refugees, Immigration made this Country Great, not Nazi fanatics like Herr Trump and the KKK and its hateful ideology. Tell Herr Trump to go back to Germany, he would fit right into the 1930’s of Adolf Hitler. Herr Trump does not fit in here in America and not only have the majority of Americans rejected his hateful racism now even Europe’s world leaders and the people in their countries have rejected Herr Trump as well. As these lines are being typed already almost 2 million British people are voting to keep Herr Trump the hell out of even setting foot in their Country of Great Britain. They would have to wash the sidewalks with disinfectant if he ever set foot there. Sweden today mocked Herr Trump in a picture showing the P.M. (a woman) sitting to the “far left” and signing a climate saving bill and surrounding her were all women.

    European leaders meeting at Gibraltar today stated they are aware Herr Trump is out to destroy their European Union and France’s Francois Hollande stated Herr Trump to be as great a threat to European Nations as Russian and Red China.

    Europe’s far right Nazi Fanatics are all emulating Herr Trumps political hate mongering tactics in hopes of coming to power and turning their countries into a haven for Right Wing Nazism. Shades of Adolf Hitler. History repeats itself, Germany’s “Frauke Petry” reincarnation of “The Bitch of Buchenwald” has previously stated refugees, including children should be machine gunned if they are caught crossing the border.

    Because of Herr Trumps Nazi rhetoric it has now become “fashionable” for the Far Right to openly express racial hatred. Mosques are being torched in places like Texas, (hot bed of Far Right extremism). Racial slurs are being used at even High School sports events because “if Herr Trump did it” then it must be socially acceptable in the minds of some young people. Yes Herr Trump is a great example to young people. Hate anyone that is different and when it comes to women its ok to sexually assault them. Great example for young men in college to emulate.

    Of course in the minds of the Far Right Herr Trump like Adolf Hitler is their living God on earth. He will build a “New America” the United States of White Anglo Saxon Christians Only” everyone else is not welcome or safe here anymore. Is a “Night of Chrystal” next on Herr Trumps list? Its not as far fetched as it sounds. The Jews said on their way to the gas chambers “It cannot be happening here, we are living in a civilized Nation”, too late they found out otherwise.

Comments are closed.