"I Refuse To Be Politically Correct" - Trump Slams Obama, Hillary; Would Use Executive Order To Suspend Immigration

Tyler Durden's picture

In a much anticipated speech in which Trump was set to rekindle his anti-immigration momentum, earlier today the repuglican candidate did not disappoint and, as expected, ripped Hillary Clinton and President Obama for pushing policies and language that he said were making the U.S. less secure and increased the likelihood of terrorist attacks on the homeland.

Speaking at St. Anselm University in New Hampshire one day after the worst mass shooting in history after a gunman who pledged allegiance to ISIS killed 49, Trump put much of the blame on U.S. immigration policies that allowed the shooter’s parents to enter the country. He also asserted there are thousands of people living in the United
States "sick with hate" and capable of carrying out just this sort of massacre.  He also criticized Obama and Clinton for arguing for stronger gun control laws, saying that would make terrorist acts more likely.

Trump said Obama and Clinton were putting “political correctness” above U.S. security in making their push. He also repeated his arguments that both should describe the U.S. as at war with radical Islam.

"I refuse to be politically correct. I want to do the right thing, I want to straighten things out, and I want to make America great again. The days of deadly ignorance will end, and they will end soon, if I'm elected," Trump raged before thousands, adding that he would end immigration from areas in the world from which people have attacked the U.S. and its allies, and attacking Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama for being weak on immigration. He also said that he would use an executive order to suspend immigration if it came to that.

With fifty people dead, and dozens more wounded, we cannot afford to talk around the issue anymore — we have to address it head on. I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger but now, many are saying I was right to do so — and although the pause is temporary, we must find out what is going on. The ban will be lifted when we as a nation are in a position to properly and perfectly screen those people coming into our country.

 

The immigration laws of the United States give the President the power to suspend entry into the country of any class of persons that the President deems detrimental to the interests or security of the United States, as he deems appropriate. I will use this power to protect the American people. When I am elected, I will suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats.

As quoted by The Hill, Trump also called on Obama to release "the full and complete immigration histories" of anyone implicated in terror activities since September 11, 2001, to better inform the public.  As he hinted with his tweets and official statement yesterday, Trump harshly criticized Obama for referring Sunday to a "terror" attack without going further. "He's not calling it what it is," Trump said. "This is radical Islamic terrorism. He doesn't want to properly describe it. And if you don't want to discuss it and describe it, you're not going to solve the problem."

He then bashed Hillary Clinton for failing to recognize the threat of radical Islamic terror, arguing that her "total denial and reluctance to ever name the enemy broadcasts weakness throughout the entire world." 

"She supports so much of what is wrong and what is wrong with this country and what is going wrong with this country and our borders. She has no clue, in my opinion, what radical Islam is, and she won't speak honestly about it if she does in fact know."

 

"Hillary Clinton's catastrophic immigration plan will bring vastly more radical Islamic immigration into this country, threatening not only our society but our entire way of life.

 

"This is a very dark moment in America's history: A radical Islamic terrorist targeted the nightclub, not only because he wanted to kill Americans, but in order to execute gay and lesbian citizens for their sexual orientation... It's strike at the heart and soul of who we are as a nation. It's an assault on the ability of free people to live their lives, love who they want and express their identity.”

He then attacked Clinton for trying to have it both ways in supporting the LGBT community, arguing that she can't consider herself an ally if she supports immigration policies that could allow potentially dangerous people into the country.

"Hillary Clinton can never claim to be a friend of the gay community as long as she continues to support immigration policies that bring Islamic extremists to our country and suppress women, gays and everyone else who shares their beliefs or values," he said.

"Ask yourself, who is really the friend of women and the LGBT community: Donald Trump with his actions, or Hillary Clinton with her words?"

Trump's hardline approach to fighting Islamic terrorism was a hallmark of his primary campaign. Besides proposing a temporary prohibition on foreign Muslims from entering the country, he has advocated using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods to try to stave off future attacks. 

While some Republican leaders have encouraged Trump to abandon his proposed Muslim ban in an effort to broaden his support among voters before November's general election, the Orlando attack appeared Sunday to harden the billionaire businessman's position.

"What has happened in Orlando is just the beginning," Trump tweeted Sunday. "Our leadership is weak and ineffective. I called it and asked for the ban. Must be tough."

* * *

A full transcript of Trump's speech below

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
N0TaREALmerican's picture
N0TaREALmerican (not verified) Jun 13, 2016 4:04 PM

 

Wait,   what about the Indian programmers and Chinese University Students?    We'll all starve without them!    

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Both Obama and Hillary are diseased drug-addled degenerate muslim-loving homosexual America-hating traitorous filth. Keep hammering them, Donald!

khnum's picture

Yes its either make America great again or make America Saudi Arabia pretty easy choice

mofio's picture
mofio (not verified) khnum Jun 13, 2016 4:56 PM

OK Trump. STOP being politically correct about APARTHEID ISRAHELL.

BaBaBouy's picture

I can't believe Omaba's speach today, what drugs is he on ????????????

READ:

""Afghanistan Migration Surging into America; 99% Support Sharia Law""

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/12/afghanistan-m...

Lorca's Novena's picture

When you want to completely erode the fabric of a great nation, undrmine its morals, and stoke the fires of evil, you call Obama. Thought that was common sense?

Rabbi Chaim Cohen's picture

Rah Rah Rah, Trump-boom-bah!

We're being PLAYED!!!!!

Whatever happens, whatever promises he makes, no matter how much you like what he says or does... WE MUST INSIST THAT HE RESTORE THE RULE OF LAW, first and foremost.

We don't want edicts, unless we want to stay the embarrassment of a country that we are now. We don't want an Obama that we like, this is not how this nation pulls itself out of the fire. A benevolent dictator is still a tyrant and the new illegitimate powers he gathers (to rousing applause) WILL be used against us and our children at some point in the future if we don't return to the rule of law.

RafterManFMJ's picture

I was 100% with you up until "Keep hammering them..." Poor choice of words...

bamawatson's picture

stay on huma

huma is key

HUMA Face of ISLAM

ThanksChump's picture

If they aren't Islamic, they can come here and shop.

They have to eat a BLT first, and like it.

Billy the Poet's picture

The dual citizens aren't going to like that.

Tallest Skil's picture

Good. We shouldn't allow dual citizenship, anyway.

Billy the Poet's picture

Agreed.

Just for fun, here's how it all went down back in '67:

 

 

"Before becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen, immigrants must take an oath that says, in part, "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen."

That language seems to firmly establish a principle of "one person, one country." But even though it sounds unequivocal, it is not. In fact, it is entirely possible for naturalized U.S. citizens to retain citizenship in another country, or for a native-born American to claim citizenship in a second country. On the face of it, this is an odd arrangement that challenges the notion that citizenship is an expression of national loyalty. How can a person be equally loyal to two countries?

Yet dual citizenship has been specifically sanctioned by the United States Supreme Court. In 1967, the court ruled that the State Department had violated the Constitution when it refused to issue a new U.S. passport to a U.S. citizen who had voted in an election in Israel. The decision overturned a law saying that "a person, who is a national of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voting in a political election in a foreign state."

 

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-dual-citizenship-2014122...

Top Hat's picture

I would suspend all immigration, not just from muzzie countries.  Close the borders, figure out who's here, boot out undesirables and let the rest get assimilated.  And dump the stupid chain immigration.  Should be about 20 to 30 years before we allow in new immigrants. 

N0TaREALmerican's picture
N0TaREALmerican (not verified) Top Hat Jun 13, 2016 4:15 PM

 

I'd base it on the real unemployment rate (personally).    I just can't imagine the top 10% standing for no immigration tho, Big-Corp loves cheap labor and the Red and Blue Team still run things, and are owned by Big-Corp.

zeronetwork's picture

I honestly believe OBL could have not imagined how deep down his actions can bring a super power.

swmnguy's picture

I have to disagree with you.  I think the guy had a better fix on the fragility of the US Empire than anyone else.  That's the key to terrorism.  The terrorist has to understand his enemy and know their tendencies and typical responses.  OBL did, or at least we're led to believe he did, exactly the right things to get the US to completely lose its shit and sow the seeds of its own rapid demise, at the demand of its own people, to the apparently huge benefit of its own Elites.  The terrorist provokes the outrageous, disproportionate response that alienates all possible intermediaries.  George W. Bush said the magic words immediately, saying "You're either with us or against us."  As soon as he heard that, OBL had to have known he  would win.  Even if OBL really died in a Pakistani hospital in 2002, as I've heard, he'd have already known he'd won by then.

zeronetwork's picture

Good insight. What if 911 was an inside job?

Oldwood's picture

And Bush may have said "you ar eeither with us or against us" but that was not aimed nearly so much at Islamic states as our allies. Further Bush repeatedly kept repeating how we were NOT at war with Islam, only radical Islam.

I knew Osama had won, once Bush pulled the trigger on the Iraq war (with big democratic support) only to see Kennedy on the senate floor screaming that it was Bush's war for oil and Bush was a war criminal. Then and there I KNEW that we would never win another war, that all wars would be internal wars from now on and those profiting from it would be pleased it was so and contribute to the waste and fraud that endured its failure. I should have understood this from Vietnam, but I simply thought that it was just a misguided insanity, not status quo.

Son of Loki's picture

Strict vetting is what makes sense and that's what Donald Trump wants and the American people want. Allow the vetted ones come in and add to our scoiety not tear it down and not massacre people.

 

Oh yeah, and please Donald take back all those assault reifles Obama's Eric "Fast & Furious" Holder gave the Mesican drug gangs, pleeze!

1033eruth's picture

Son of Loki - How you going to vet them?  Put your little pea brain to work and tell me how that can happen.  Going to run an NCIC check on them?  Going to ask their home town for a police report?  WHAT?

Going to have the FBI go door to door in his home town and interview the neighbors?  You're fucking stupid.  They can't be vetted dimwit.  Why haven't you given it an OUNCE OF THOUGHT?  You think they have a computerized criminal system?  DO YOU REALLY?

Vetting consists of INTERVIEWS.  And nobody lies at an interview RIGHT?  And what about the translator?  Who's going to vouch for him?  You know damn well its going to be an Obama approved translator.  Jesus H. CHRIST, you're fucking stupid. 

Déjà view's picture

Reform BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP! MAKE IT RETROACTIVE 50 YEARS!

Birthright Citizenship is the practice of granting automatic citizenship to children born in the United States. Under current federal law, nearly all children born in the U.S. receive automatic citizenship, regardless of whether their parents are lawfully in the country. This practice has created a magnet for foreign nationals who want their children to have U.S. citizenship and spawned creation of a cottage industry devoted to helping pregnant "tourists" illicitly enter this country for the purpose of giving birth.

In 2010, "there were 4.5 million U.S.-born children whose parents were unauthorized [illegal]," according to the Pew Hispanic Center (Pew Hispanic Research Trends Project, "A Nation of Immigrants: A Portion of the 40 Million, Including 11 Million Unauthorized," Pew Hispanic Center, Jan. 29, 2013.) The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has estimated that nearly 200,000 children are born annually "to foreign women admitted as visitors, that is, tourists, students, guest workers, and other non-immigrant categories."

Eight percent of all U.S. births (approximately 350,000 a year) come from at least one illegal-alien parent, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.

The United States and Canada are the only developed nations that grant automatic citizenship so expansively to children born within their borders. Anyone born in the United States is considered an American citizen regardless of whether the parents are U.S. citizens, legal residents, temporary visitors, or illegal aliens in the U.S. (Here is a more detailed country-by-country list of the status of national laws regarding birthright citizenship.) Automatic citizenship is granted according to federal statute, not the 14th Amendment, so critics of the policy argue that this could be reformed by changing or repealing the statute outright.

Veteran legal scholar John Eastman believes that Members of Congress who passed the 14th Amendment never intended that it include Birthright Citizenship in its current form. Eastman points to the wording of the 1866 Civil Rights Act as providing the key to the meaning of the 14th Amendment and the intent of the Framers.

The act provides that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States." This formulation makes clear, Eastman writes, that any child born on U.S. soil to parents who were temporary visitors to this country and remained a citizen or subject of the parents' home country "was not entitled to claim the birthright citizenship provided by the 1866 Act."

https://www.numbersusa.com/solutions/reform-birthright-citizenship

BTW...FOREIGN DIPLOMATS ARE DENIED THIS COURTESY.

Déjà view's picture

The overwhelming majority of the world’s countries do not offer automatic citizenship to everyone born within their borders. Over the past few decades, many countries that once did so — including Australia, Ireland, India, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Malta, and the Dominican Republic — have repealed those policies. Other countries are considering changes.

Among the findings:

  • Only 30 of the world’s 194 countries grant automatic citizenship to children born to illegal aliens.
  • Of advanced economies, Canada and the United States are the only countries that grant automatic citizenship to children born to illegal aliens.
  • No European country grants automatic citizenship to children of illegal aliens.
  • The global trend is moving away from automatic birthright citizenship as many countries that once had such policies have ended them in recent decades.
  • 14th Amendment history seems to indicate that the Citizenship Clause was never intended to benefit illegal aliens nor legal foreign visitors temporarily present in the United States.
  • The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the U.S.-born children of permanent resident aliens are covered by the Citizenship Clause, but the Court has never decided whether the same rule applies to the children of aliens whose presence in the United States is temporary or illegal.
  • Some eminent scholars and jurists have concluded that it is within the power of Congress to define the scope of the Citizenship Clause through legislation and that birthright citizenship for the children of temporary visitors and illegal aliens could likely be abolished by statute without amending the Constitution.

The international findings in this report are the result of direct communication with foreign government officials and analysis of relevant foreign law. It is the most current research on global birthright citizenship data.

The Impact of Birthright Citizenship

Between 300,000 and 400,000 children are born to illegal immigrants in the United States every year. Put another way, as many as one out of 10 births in the United States is to an illegal immigrant mother.2 All of these children are considered by the executive branch of the U.S. government to be U.S. citizens who enjoy the same rights and are entitled to the same benefits as the children of U.S. citizens.

The population of U.S.-born children with illegal alien parents has expanded rapidly in recent years from 2.3 million in 2003 to 4 million in 2008; since these figures do not include children who are 18 years of age or older nor those who are married, the actual figure is somewhat larger.3

The two citizenship benefits that have drawn the most attention in the birthright citizenship debate are, first, food assistance and other welfare benefits to which a family of illegal aliens would not otherwise have access, and second, the ability of the child when he grows up to legalize his parents, and also to bring into the United States his foreign-born spouse and any foreign-born siblings. The sponsored spouse can, in turn, sponsor her own foreign-born parents and siblings, and the siblings can, in turn, sponsor their own foreign-born spouses, and so on, generating a virtually never-ending and always-expanding migration chain.

Because having a child on U.S. soil can cement an immigrant’s presence in the United States, provide access to welfare benefits, and ultimately initiate chain migration of the child’s extended family and in-laws, children born to illegal aliens and legal temporary visitors are sometimes referred to as “anchor babies.” These benefits have contributed to the growth of a “birth tourism” industry.

 

The voices calling for a change to the current application of the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment are quite diverse and are not limited to activists and policymakers. The influential Circuit Court Judge Richard Posner held in a recent court decision that the policy of granting automatic birthright citizenship for children of illegal and temporary aliens is one that “Congress should rethink” and that the United States “should not be encouraging foreigners to come to the United States solely to enable them to confer U.S. citizenship on their future children.”4

Benefits. Most benefits Americans would regard as “welfare” are not accessible to illegal immigrants. However, illegal immigrants can obtain welfare benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps on behalf of their U.S.-born children. Many of the welfare costs associated with illegal immigration, therefore, are due to the current birthright citizenship policy. Put another way, greater efforts at barring illegal aliens from federal welfare programs will not significantly reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access the benefits. Nationwide, 40 percent of illegal alien-headed households receive some type of welfare. In some states, the rate is higher: in New York, 49 percent receive welfare; in California, the rate is 48 percent; in Texas, it is 44 percent; and in Georgia, 42 percent of illegal alien-headed households receive welfare.5 Only 19 percent of households headed by native-born citizens make use of a major welfare program.

Of course, states offer additional welfare benefits as well. Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich recently released data from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services indicating that children of illegal aliens in Los Angeles Country received $50 million in welfare benefits during the month of February 2010 alone. The report estimates that 23 percent of all CALWORKS and food stamp issuances in Los Angeles County are to illegal immigrant parents who collect on their U.S.-born children’s behalf. The supervisor estimates that illegal immigration and birthright citizenship cost taxpayers in Los Angeles County over $1 billion annually, not including education costs.6

Despite taxpayers’ assistance, approximately 59 percent of illegal aliens and their U.S.-born children live in or near poverty. In total, 21.5 million immigrants (legal and illegal) and their young children live in or near poverty. In California, Arizona, Texas, and Colorado illegal aliens and their U.S.-born children account for roughly a fifth of the those in poverty.7 Ultimately, treating the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens as citizens has the statistical effect of increasing the percentage of U.S. citizens living in poverty.

It is important to remember that births to illegal aliens are not spread evenly throughout the United States. Some states, particularly those closer to the southern border, carry a much larger burden. According to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, between 60,000 to 65,000 babies are born to illegal aliens in Texas every year, representing about 16 percent of total births statewide. The report estimates that between 2001 and 2009, births to illegal immigrant women totaled 542,152 in Texas alone.8

Chain Migration. A child born to illegal aliens in the United States can initiate a chain of immigration when he reaches the age of 18 and can sponsor an overseas spouse and unmarried children of his own. When he turns 21, he can also sponsor his parents and any brothers and sisters.9

Family-sponsored immigration accounts for most of the nation’s growth in immigration levels. Of the 1,130,818 immigrants who were granted legal permanent residency in 2009, a total of 747,413 (or, 66.1 percent) were family-sponsored immigrants. A change to U.S. immigration laws in the late 1950s — one that allowed for the admission of extended family members outside the nuclear family — resulted in the average annual flow increasing from 250,000 then, to over 1 million today. This number continues to rise every year because of the ever-expanding migration chains that operate independently of any economic downturns or labor needs.10 Although automatic and universal birthright citizenship is not the only contributor to chain migration, ending it would prevent some of this explosive growth.

The issue of birthright citizenship for the children of aliens who have not been admitted for permanent residence cannot be resolved in isolation from other immigration issues. For example, politicians on both sides of the aisle regularly call for an increase in temporary workers, but the economic and social impact of children born to these workers while they are in the United States is never part of the discussion. Under any large-scale guestworker program, it is likely that tens of thousands of children would be born on U.S. soil. If the guestworker does not depart when his work visa expires, he becomes an illegal alien and is subject to deportation. But immigration authorities cannot deport the guestworker’s citizen child along with the overstaying guestworker. The result is that the guestworker makes the case for indefinite stay based on the principle of “keeping families together” — an argument that is often successful at stopping an alien’s deportation. Because of birthright citizenship, what started as a policy to bring in laborers on a temporary basis can become yet another channel for permanent immigration. This is one of the reasons why some have said that “there is often nothing more permanent than a temporary worker.”11

Birth Tourism. The significant benefits of U.S. citizenship and the executive branch’s permissive birthright citizenship policies have become a magnet for those seeking to add a U.S. passport holder to their family. An entire industry of “birth tourism” has been created and the phenomenon of pregnant women traveling (legally) to the United States specifically for the purpose of giving birth on U.S. soil has grown largely without any debate in Congress or the consent of the public.

“It’s easy. If you register the birth, it’s automatic that your baby can get an American passport,” said Kim Jeong Yeon, a Korean woman who traveled to the United States on a tourist visa while six months pregnant.12 Like many other women, Kim spent thousands of dollars to have a company arrange the travel. “If they could afford it, all my friends would go to the United States to have their babies,” she said.

According to Selin Burcuoglu, a Turkish woman who traveled to the United States to give birth last year, the process was easy: “We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin for our child’s birth. It was incredibly professional. They organized everything for me. I had no problem adjusting and I had an excellent birth. I don’t want her to deal with visa issues — American citizenship has so many advantages.”13

Birth tourism can be a lucrative business for immigrants who facilitate the travel and birthing process for their former countrymen. Turkish doctors, hotel owners, and immigrant families in the United States have assembled what amounts to a birth-tourism assembly line, reportedly arranging the U.S. birth of 12,000 Turkish children since 2003. The Turkish-owned Marmara Hotel group offers a “birth tourism package” that includes accommodations at their Manhattan branch. “We hosted 15 families last year,” said Nur Ercan Ma?den, head manager of The Marmara Manhattan, adding that the cost was $45,000 each.14

Similarly, the Tucson Medical Center (TMC) in Arizona offers a “birth package” to expectant mothers and actively recruits in Mexico. Expectant mothers can schedule a Caesarean or simply arrive a few weeks before their due date. The cost reportedly ranges from $2,300 to $4,600 and includes a hospital stay, exams, and a massage. Additional children trigger a surcharge of $500.

“These are families with a lot of money, and some arrive on private jets and are picked up by an ambulance and brought here,” said Shawn Page, TMC’s administrator of international services and relations.15

In California, three Chinese-owned “baby care centers” offer expectant mothers a place to give birth to an American citizen for a fee of $14,750, which includes shopping and sightseeing trips. For a $35 daily fee, television, internet, and three meals are provided. “We don’t encourage moms to break the law — just to take advantage of it,” explains Robert Zhou, the agency’s owner. Zhou says that he and his wife have helped up to 600 women give birth in the United States within the last five years. In fact, they started the business after traveling to the United States to have a child of their own. Zhou explains that the number of agencies like his has soared in the past five years.16

Zhou believes that a cheaper education is often a motivating factor and his pitch to prospective clients includes the notion that public education in the United States is “free.” One of his clients, Christina Chuo, explains that her parents “paid a huge amount of money for their education” in the United States because they were foreign students; having an American citizen child permits her child to acquire the same education at a lower tuition. She also noted that she and her husband were not interested in permanently immigrating to the United States, “except, perhaps, when they retire.”17

As discussion about limiting birthright citizenship heats up in the United States, some foreign countries are concerned about possible changes. The Nigerian media, for example, recently published an article titled, “American Agitations Threaten a Nigerian Practice.” The practice referred to is that of Nigerians traveling to the United States to have a child — a practice that, according to the newspaper, is “spreading so fast that it is close to becoming an obsession.”18

The U.S. State Department is not permitted to deny a woman a temporary visitor visa simply because she is pregnant and the legal document she obtains means she is not likely to be stopped at the border.19 Consequently, the practice of granting automatic birthright citizenship allows a seemingly temporary admission of one foreign visitor to result in a permanent increase in immigration and grants of citizenship that were not necessarily contemplated or welcomed by the American public. Add to this the fact that immigration authorities are less likely to deport a visitor who overstays their permitted time if they have a U.S. citizen child, and one ends up with an immigration policy quite different from that which was originally intended.

The birth tourism industry illustrates how the executive branch’s permissive birthright citizenship policies can have the effect of transferring control over the nation’s immigration policy from the American people to foreigners.

http://cis.org/birthright-citizenship

Déjà view's picture

The Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment

Before the 14th Amendment, citizenship was granted by states, and subsequently recognized by the federal government. Although the 13th Amendment officially ended slavery in 1865, it was not sufficient for the purpose of making freed slaves citizens of the United States. In the 1857 case Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Supreme Court held that blacks, even those freed from slavery, were not citizens of the United States.32 In the aftermath of the Civil War, some states were preventing freed slaves form gaining federal citizenship by denying state citizenship. “Black Codes” passed into law by some states denied many other civil rights.

These injustices led to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was aimed, in part, at overruling the Dred Scott decision and which laid the groundwork for enactment of the 14th Amendment two years later. The Act declared, among other things:

“That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States;”33

Two years later in 1868, the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment would be closely patterned on the citizenship declaration of the 1866 Act. Both intended to exclude from birthright citizenship at least some U.S.-born persons where a competing claim of subjectship or citizenship existed. The 1866 Act drew the line by excluding persons “subject to any foreign power,” while the 14th Amendment included only persons “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States.34 In either case what was being weighed was competing claims to the future allegiance of the child.35

http://cis.org/birthright-citizenship

Laddie's picture

@N0TaREALmerican
I needed a laugh!!!

Whites invented EVERYTHING of value in the world today.
Yet we are told over and over and over again by media and churches and education and the government that Whites are GARBAGE who, as Oprah Winfrey said on British TV, DIE, THEN and only then, did she say, will "racism" end.

The ONLY Fools who are NOT racist are the Whites who have a Christian heritage whether they are believers or not.

The (Jewish) Daily Forward:

Central Florida’s Jewish community started laying the groundwork for interfaith cooperation with Muslims Monday as the nation reeled in grief and anger after an anti-gay gunman killed 50 people in the worst-ever mass killing in recent U.S. history.

Rabbi Steven Engel of the Congregation for Reform Judaism, the largest synagogue in Orlando, and Imam Muhammad Masri, president of the Islamic Society of Central Florida, spoke by phone to plan a joint memorial service for the victims at the Pulse nightclub attack, which was carried out by an American Muslim with roots in Afghanistan.

“(We want) to support each other, to support the whole community,” Masri said outside the bullet-scarred club on a busy Orlando artery.

Like Jewish leaders, Masri emphasized that suspected gunman Omar Mateen was an American who would not have been affected by proposals spearheaded by Donald Trump to bar Muslims from entering the U.S.

“He came from two hours away. You can’t put a border to stop someone like this,” Masri said, adding that he did not consider the gunman to be a Muslim.

Mark Hetfield, president and CEO of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), which has been bringing Moslems into the USA for decades writes:

HIAS was established 135 years ago to protect refugees — Jewish ones — who were fleeing the pogroms of Czarist Russia. HIAS, which always refers to itself as the “global Jewish non-profit that protects refugees,” is not searching for a new mission. We remain true to the original one of refugee protection. What HIAS has done is moved from its “Exodus” period of our first 120 years, in which HIAS focused on bringing Jews from oppression to freedom, to our “Leviticus” period, in which we fulfill Jewish values and assist refugees of all faiths and ethnicities based on our own Exodus experiences.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Refugee Convention of 1951 and its 1967 Protocol — heavily advocated by the Jewish community, Israel and HIAS — now provide us with the principles to help ensure that never again will refugees be pushed back into the hands of their persecutors.

Professor Kevin MacDonald’s ‘The Culture of Critique’ Reviewed This review, written in 1999, explains what the Tribe has done to the White nations.

It is often said that when the old immigration policy was scrapped in 1965, scarcely anyone knew, and no one predicted, that the new law would change the racial makeup of the country. Prof. MacDonald disputes this, arguing that this had been the objective of Jewish groups from the beginning.

"The strengthening of multicultural or diverse Australia is also our most effective insurance policy against anti-Semitism. The day Australia has a Chinese Australian Governor General I would feel more confident of my freedom to live as a Jewish Australian."
--Miriam Faine, editorial committee member of the Australian Jewish Democrat

On Invasions, Traitors, and Gathering Storms by Andrew Joyce, PhD

We have within our walls a foreign people that has, on so many occasions, played its hand as the facilitator of incursions into Europe, as the histories of Cordoba, Seville, and the Arab conquest of Spain in general so strongly illustrate. As the storm rages and the waves crash in, our efforts to stem the tide have been hampered by a group intent on putting holes in the levees; who are working unceasingly to find new channels for the water to pour in. Their tactics may be diverse, but their mentality is monolithic. They are tireless and ruthless in their efforts to ensure that the Old Continent continues to leak like a sieve. They cherish dreams of its final vanishing beneath the waves.

N0TaREALmerican's picture
N0TaREALmerican (not verified) Laddie Jun 13, 2016 4:39 PM

 

Jezzz,  how did the jews get dragged into this thread?  Everybody was happily hating the Muslims and you go and split the hate in half.   Half the hate isn't the same as all the hate!
|

What's the matter with you?

Laddie's picture

You are FUNNY, and I said earlier I NEEDED a laugh and now I've laughed yet again. You know the top FUNNY guy on ZH is Mr Banzai but you have the makings of a good one.
Thanks again!

Billy the Poet's picture

Whites invented EVERYTHING of value in the world today.

 

 

"Americans owe directly to the Saracens our southwestern and Californian architecture, our cotton industry, our asphalt paving, and a long list of such things as beds, table and bed linens, small occasional tables, strawberries, ice-cream. Americans speak Arabic when they say, mattress, sofa, cotton, talcum, sugar, coffee, sherbert, naphtha, gypsum, benzine. Our cars run, our streets are paved, our houses are furnished and our bodies clothed with things that the Saracens created.

 

The returning Crusaders brought back to Europe the first idea of a gentleman that Europeans had ever had. Until they invaded the Saracens' civilization, they had never known that a strong man need not be brutal. The Saracens were splendid fighters when they fought, but they were not cruel; they did not torture their prisoners, they did not kill the wounded. In their own country, they did not persecute the Christians. They were brave men, but they were gentle. They were honorable; they told the truth, they kept their word. This ideal of a gentleman especially impressed the English. It is still producing perhaps the finest class of human beings on earth today, the men and women of the British ruling class. It is an ideal that permeates all of American life. This is what surprises so many people in many parts of the world, when they see and meet the common American soldiers and sailors." --  Rose Wilder Lane (daughter of Laura Ingalls Wilder), American libertarian author.

 

http://mises.org/sites/default/files/The%20Discovery%20of%20Freedom_2.pdf

root superuser's picture

The tribe is author of their own downfall. They are repeating same mistake as they did in Wiemar which led to rise of Hitler. Putin already has wrench in their works. Tribe have already destroyed their host economy to the point where they cant win another cold war. So only way to stop Russia is hot war. And if Putin didnt have nukes and said repeatedly he is willing to use them we would be in hot war with Russia already. Looks like Putin is smarter than Hitler was. And he is outplaying them while their empire is crumbling.

They should have left our economy intact but they just couldnt help themselves. Just like the scorpio from the story of scorpio and frog.

The Lie Hurts's picture

I am currently reading a Kindle book called "Sweet Dreams and Terror Cells (When Giants Break the Spell Book 1)" by an Indian immigrant named Frank Raymond who has lived in Vancouver, BC for 22 years. I heard him on the Red Ice Radio podcast. He is strongly urging white people to wake the hell up and stop the immigrant invasion of their countries. He is one of the few third world immigrants that I have heard that actually appreciates Western culture. The story is fictional but he makes excellent points and laments how much poorer the world will be when the white race dies out.

https://www.amazon.com/Sweet-Dreams-Terror-Cells-Giants-ebook/dp/B01FLMC...

Silver Sativa's picture

Unfortunately, this is the absolute truth. The American "education" "system" is a complete bedlam of degenerates, bullies, statists, and teachers who don't g.a.f.

Do the fact our education system sucks, this country cannot even educate the young minds we need to fill our colleges and universities, to fill those high-tech jobs of the future.You guessed it: We (even) outsource our intelligencia:  https://youtu.be/NK0Y9j_CGgM

Watch and weep.

sixsigma cygnusatratus's picture

"I refuse to be politically correct."

 

This must be enraging to the Saudis who now must feel they have wasted all that money on Hillary.

Crash Overide's picture

I have to admit, Trump actually makes sense compared to all the liars in Washington.

I still can't figure out if it's a setup but it's fun to watch.

alexcojones's picture

Orlando?

 

One Million New Trump Voters, guaranteed.

CJgipper's picture

The programming and pack mentatility of being gay will override all common sense and reason.  They will vote Hillary like they're told so that they get to stayin teh gay community.  Watch and see.

N0TaREALmerican's picture
N0TaREALmerican (not verified) CJgipper Jun 13, 2016 4:44 PM

 

That's true.  It's would be like a Flag Lapel-Pin Wearing Patriot admitting the Weapons of Masses Delusion were a false flag.   
|

People vote Red and Blue Team because their brains are hardwired to do so,  nobody is thinking about it.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

 

I would be much more inclined to believe Donald Trump than $hillary Clito.

lakecity55's picture

You mean, Hyena 'I get 20% of my campaign from Saudi' Rodent?

38BWD22's picture

 

 

 

Bwa ha.  Could not have put it better myself.  And I tried!  

 

LOL

alexcojones's picture

Don sounding more Presidential with each passing CRISES (daily occurence).

     "Hillary Clinton can never claim to be a friend of the gay community as long as she continues to support immigration policies that bring Islamic extremists to our country and suppress women, gays and everyone else who shares their beliefs or values," Trump said.

   "Ask yourself, who is really the friend of women and the LGBT community: Donald Trump with his actions, or Hillary Clinton with her words?"

  Welcome aboard the Donald Trump juggernaut, You Million new LGBT voters.

N0TaREALmerican's picture
N0TaREALmerican (not verified) alexcojones Jun 13, 2016 4:11 PM

 

The Red Team loving Christian Fundamentalists are NOT going to be voting for The Donald after hearing him defend gays and lesbians.   He'll lose two or three Christian Fundamentalist vote for every LGBT vote. 

PRO.223's picture

You're wrong, I'm a Christian fundamentalist and I will be voting for Donald Trump!

Billy the Poet's picture

I didn't say a word about Christian Fundamentalists. That was another guy.

John_Coltrane's picture

Well you're wrong about atheists too.  I'm one and the more I hear from the Donald, the more I like him.  We liberatarians not only in favor removal of drug laws, but don't mind gays and lesbians, as long as we don't have to see men kissing each other in public.  Let's face it, its gross and unnatural.

The donald is uniting the liberatarian, fundamentalist, and even gays sectors.  Everyone loves a winner.  We're tired of whiners like Hitlery and Obummer.  No more gun grabbers in the white house!  Events are unfolding to insure a Trump landslide in the fall.

Billy the Poet's picture

Well you're wrong about atheists too.

 

I did not say that no atheists would vote for Trump or that you specifically would not vote for Trump. So where was I in error?

 

but don't mind gays and lesbians, as long as we don't have to see men kissing each other in public.  Let's face it, its gross and unnatural.

 

What I don't like is the way that government and media demand that normal people accept and celebrate homosexuality. Doing what you want to do in the privacy of your home is fine but forcing others to participate in your lifestyle through government edicts is tyrannical.

 

The donald is uniting the liberatarian, fundamentalist, and even gays sectors.


Gary Johnson, Ron Paul and I will opt out if you don't mind.

 

Everyone loves a winner.

 

Wouldn't that depend on what has been won and how it's been won or don't libertarians like you or your fundamentalist allies have any principles?

 

No more gun grabbers in the white house!

 

When Trump ran for President in 2000 he favored the "assault weapons" ban. He's apparently flip flopped on that and could flip flop again. Omar Mateen did use an "assault rifle" (as Donald calls them), you know. For what its worth I'm much more comfortable in protecting my own Second Amendment rights than leaving it up to another who has a questionable history on the matter.

N0TaREALmerican's picture
N0TaREALmerican (not verified) PRO.223 Jun 13, 2016 4:24 PM

 

You aren't worried that God is going to smite the US (or worse, yourself) for voting to further the Gay and Lesbian agenda that Ted Cruz warned everybody about?