This could be provocative the the mullahs. Just when their stance had softened over the obama years to an official policy of, "DEATH TO AMERICA! DEATH TO THE GREAT SATAN!" Maybe if Trump bows repeatedly in their direction and sends them pallets stacked with currency, we can go back to 'normal'.
I support the immigration restriction, though I find is far less effective than if it had included Saudi Arabia......but can't this Administration get it's act together; with Spicer denying that it's a "ban".....and Giuliani saying that "ban" is exactly the term Trump used.
I agree, but we don't see "refugees" coming from Saudi and it seems that the "vetting" is the issue. Having said that, I'm not so sure Iraq should be on the list, but you'd know better than I. And I think those previously vetted (green cards, interpreters, etc.) should not have initially been included, that being a gaffe.
Nobody will ever convince me Saudi doesn't have nukes or SOME amazing hold on the West. Look at the accomodations for 3 million, HVAC, comfortable, etc...used only at the time of the HAJ. They haven't taken ONE refugee. Europeans are scared to death of the muslims coming in....who has the nukes? SOMEONE's threatened everyone. That's my humble hypothesis.
The irony of KSA is that while they take very little in the way of refugees.....nearly their entire menial labor force, is comprised of Yemeni's, Filipinos and Bangladeshi's [for the most part].
11 comments:
This could be provocative the the mullahs. Just when their stance had softened over the obama years to an official policy of, "DEATH TO AMERICA! DEATH TO THE GREAT SATAN!" Maybe if Trump bows repeatedly in their direction and sends them pallets stacked with currency, we can go back to 'normal'.
Let's return to the policy of that respected President, Jimmy Carter, and place travel restrictions on troublesome Muslim nations, instead.
I support the immigration restriction, though I find is far less effective than if it had included Saudi Arabia......but can't this Administration get it's act together; with Spicer denying that it's a "ban".....and Giuliani saying that "ban" is exactly the term Trump used.
IF it were a true ban, why did it not include Indonesia, Pakistan and India???
I agree, but we don't see "refugees" coming from Saudi and it seems that the "vetting" is the issue.
Having said that, I'm not so sure Iraq should be on the list, but you'd know better than I.
And I think those previously vetted (green cards, interpreters, etc.) should not have initially been included, that being a gaffe.
Eggs ackly.
Nobody will ever convince me Saudi doesn't have nukes or SOME amazing hold on the West. Look at the accomodations for 3 million, HVAC, comfortable, etc...used only at the time of the HAJ. They haven't taken ONE refugee.
Europeans are scared to death of the muslims coming in....who has the nukes? SOMEONE's threatened everyone. That's my humble hypothesis.
Saud has the chokehold of petrodollars.
We have a precarious currency and they could crash it.
The irony of KSA is that while they take very little in the way of refugees.....nearly their entire menial labor force, is comprised of Yemeni's, Filipinos and Bangladeshi's [for the most part].
- CI
Let's get this thing fired up before the evil has a chance to improve their defensive shield.
The people have spoken.
Post a Comment