Kobach confirms Muslim Registry in the US

[Hif]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN13B05C

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who helped write tough immigration laws in Arizona and elsewhere, said in an interview that Trump's policy advisers had also discussed drafting a proposal for his consideration to reinstate a registry for immigrants from Muslim countries.

Kobach, who media reports say is a key member of Trump's transition team, said he had participated in regular conference calls with about a dozen Trump immigration advisers for the past two to three months.

So it seems now we are entering the days of a fascist regime. Registering people just based on their faith. Welcome to the land of the free.

[Machismo]

I'll believe it when I see it. And if they do try it, I will fight against it.

[Flarelaine]

If Congress passes it, things have gone further south than I have thought.

[Cerilis]

They shouldnt forget to also have them wear bright armbinds with a crescent moon on it, geez. <.<

[unbound]

Have they announced their 25-point plan yet?

[Daneman]

Sounds like something every other country should make a policy.

[Azadina]

Step 3 of minority concentration camps seem to be complete. Only few more to go.

[Logwyn]

Someone pulled out the Nazi card quick on this one.

"Too bad you missed the "In 2010, he helped draft an Arizona law that required state and local officials to check the immigration status of individuals stopped by police. Parts of the law, which was fiercely opposed by Hispanic and civil rights groups, were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2011.

Kobach was also the architect of a 2013 Kansas law requiring voters to provide proof-of-citizenship documents, such as birth certificates or U.S. passports, when registering for the first time. A U.S. appeals court blocked that law after challenges from civil rights groups."

Seems like the checks and balances put in place are working to keep it the land of the free?
Or maybe you are just spinning something so you can pull the Nazi card out?

[Eliandal]

Even though I am (non practising) Catholic (and thankfully Canadian) - I would register simply as a form of protest!

[Machismo]

Even though I am (non practising) Catholic (and thankfully Canadian) - I would register simply as a form of protest!

A better protest would be to burn and destroy the registry.

[Jonuts]

Technically, it's not registering people for their faith. It's registering them based on their country of origin. Muslims not immigrating from those countries wouldn't have to register. Not sure if that difference matters to anyone or not, but it is a difference.

Personally, I think if there's concerns about immigrants from these countries, we should just blanket deny immigration from them and be done with it. Cheaper and easier.

[Flarelaine]

Someone pulled out the Nazi card quick on this one.

"Too bad you missed the "In 2010, he helped draft an Arizona law that required state and local officials to check the immigration status of individuals stopped by police. Parts of the law, which was fiercely opposed by Hispanic and civil rights groups, were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2011.

Kobach was also the architect of a 2013 Kansas law requiring voters to provide proof-of-citizenship documents, such as birth certificates or U.S. passports, when registering for the first time. A U.S. appeals court blocked that law after challenges from civil rights groups."

Seems like the checks and balances put in place are working to keep it the land of the free?
Or maybe you are just spinning something so you can pull the Nazi card out?

Having been thwarted makes the proposal itself no less Nazi. In fact, the courts confirmed it. I've already remarked above that I do not yet see this as becoming law, but the shoe fits.

[Ahovv]

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/u...cle4730825.ece - "Only one in three British Muslims would tip off the police if they believed that somebody close to them had become involved with terrorist sympathisers,"

Oh, this one is great: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.o...-Poll-Data.pdf - 19% of American Muslims believe violence is justified to make Shariah the law of the land in the country, and 24% believe it is appropriate to use violence to punish those depicting the prophet Mohammed.

These are not insignificant values. This is not 0.001%. The peaceful majority, in this case, is irrelevant.

I will accept the argument that Muslim immigrants are no different from other immigrants when the available data suggests that. Until then, people need to realize that a huge chunk of these people will not assimilate and share our goal of liberty. I do not accept the idea that we should take in literally anyone, with any set of views. We should be more discerning when it comes to immigration, and prefer the best candidates.

[Deleted]

Interesting.

Let's see how this works out and copy it in Europe if the results are positive.

[Machismo]

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/u...cle4730825.ece - "Only one in three British Muslims would tip off the police if they believed that somebody close to them had become involved with terrorist sympathisers,"

Oh, this one is great: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.o...-Poll-Data.pdf - 19% of American Muslims believe violence is justified to make Shariah the law of the land in the country, and 24% believe it is appropriate to use violence to punish those depicting the prophet Mohammed.

These are not insignificant values. This is not 0.001%. The peaceful majority, in this case, is irrelevant.

I will accept the argument that Muslim immigrants are no different from other immigrants when the available data suggests that.

It is relevant. People shouldn't be held responsible for the acts of another. How many Christians want to force Christianity on others? Should we make sure to register and monitor all Christians, because some are forceful about it? Should we register all black males, because black males are more likely to commit crimes?

Do we actually have a goal of liberty in this country? It seems hard to say as such, when people do their damndest to take away the liberties of others at every turn.

- - - Updated - - -

Interesting.

Let's see how this works out and copy it in Europe if the results are positive.

I'm not sure the results of pure authoritarianism are ever very positive.

[Deleted]

So it seems now we are entering the days of a fascist regime. Registering people just based on their faith. Welcome to the land of the free.

So little text yet reading with tainted glasses... I'll highlight the difference:

a registry for immigrants from Muslim countries.

Is this a registry based on faith or based on origin? Not saying it's the right way to go - actually I think it's an awful way to go - but there is still a difference. However I'll be curious to see how they determine what a Muslim country is. Indonesia with close to 90% of the populaiton being Muslim? I'm inclined to believe they will sort immigrants based on the color of their skin rather than country.

[derpkitteh]

i fully support that idea.

expand it all religions, too.

[Independent voter]

Here's a big article about him and his possibilities to become the AG. It's from a legit source

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/poli...114950423.html

Nothing about Muslim registry, just a law he pushed to have police ask Latinos for documentation which caused a big uproar in South Western states. Most of that law has been struck down.

[Ahovv]

It is relevant. People shouldn't be held responsible for the acts of another. How many Christians want to force Christianity on others? Should we make sure to register and monitor all Christians, because some are forceful about it? Should we register all black males, because black males are more likely to commit crimes?

- - - Updated - - -



I'm not sure the results of pure authoritarianism are ever very positive.

You should consider that the polling data I provided is only similar for westernized countries. In largely populated Muslim nations such as Egpyt and Pakistan, *majorities* hold extremist, violent views. I agree that you shouldn't hold one person responsible for the act of another, but at a certain percentage you must admit we should change our thinking on the matter.

Since ~20% extremist rate does not bother you, would a 60%? 90%? 99%? If literally 99% of Muslims were radicals who actually believed in violence as an appropriate response for drawing Mohammed, would you still be ok with mass-accepting Muslim immigrants/refugees?

As for Christians, the same thing would apply. If there was a significant proportion of Christians who believed in violence for me depicting Jesus, then I wouldn't want them coming over also. If there was a significant proportion of Christians who wouldn't report other Christians for terrorist attacks on civilians, I'd be opposed to Christians coming over.

[Machismo]

i fully support that idea.

expand it all religions, too.

Including atheism and agnosticism? They are religions in their own right.