Crippling Terrorism in One Step

Pages: 1 2

My plan is quite simple: Once it is determined that a country gives “safe haven” to terrorists or their training camps, like Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, then immediately, all visas – tourist visas, student visas, professional work visas, and even naturalization applications – shall be suspended and placed in moratorium. Determination should be decided by intelligence officials and not the State Department in this case. Those Muslim nationals who are currently abroad will not be able to obtain a visa to visit the U.S. or other Western countries during the visa moratorium period. Those Muslims who are already in the U.S. would be permitted to complete their specific visa purpose so that their studies or work are not interrupted. At the end of the educational or employment term, the current visas would be suspended and the Muslim “moderates” who hold them would be required to return home until the moratorium is lifted. This would also include naturalization applications by Muslim moderates, who are in the process of applying for U.S. or Western citizenship. Their applications would be suspended, and they would be required to wait for their U.S. or Western citizenship until the moratorium was lifted.

During the moratorium period, the thousands of aliens who reside in countries which harbor terrorist and who have applied for visas will be distressed, to say the least, if they are not able to travel to the Western country of their choice. These Muslim moderates would bring immediate and overwhelming pressure on their own governments to pressure our State Department to issue visas. The response from our State Department would be simple: “Your country has been declared a ‘host to terrorists,’ and when you have eliminated that threat, we will be happy to issue visas once again.” This response would be no different than one applied to airports which are considered to be non-safe and to which American airplanes will not fly. The decision to declare a country a “haven” for terrorists should not, again, be made by the State Department, as it is sensitive to political influences.

At this point the leverage begins. The pressure on the country that hosts the terrorists will be brought to bear, not by Western soldiers, but rather by the indigenous Muslim moderates who would then see to it that terrorism, and support for it, in their country would be eliminated. Standing by as their coreligionists wage war against the West would have an immediate cost to moderate Muslims. Not helping the West would prevent Muslim moderates from living, working, or studying amongst us.

If these Muslim countries decide to reciprocate and ban Westerners from visiting, they will then hurt only themselves, since foreign investment would dry up. This would only add to the leverage discussed above, as businessmen will pressure their own governments to allow foreign visitors to enter the country.

The forces of the Left will, as expected, object to this plan as “collective punishment.” However, there is already collective punishment that Americans and others throughout the West suffer each time we take an airplane or enter a government office building. We are obliged to undress ourselves because of a potential Muslim bomb. We have already forgotten what it means to live in a society that is not racked with fear.

The advantage of my suggestion is that we do not have to commit one soldier or one penny in order to drive the host country to eradicate its own nest of terrorists. This plan would have most likely prevented the Times Square bomber from training in Pakistan, and it would have surely prevented other terrorists from inflicting so much pain and suffering upon us.

I do not know who has the courage to initiate this policy, but any administration that is really interested in fighting terrorism would be taking a giant step in the right direction by implementing this visa moratorium.  It will work like a fulcrum, using the leverage of the moderate Muslim majority to bring pressure on their own governments to eradicate terrorism. These governments have until now refused to take up this task, despite billions of dollars that we lavish and waste on them.

Daniel Retter has been a practicing immigration attorney in Miami and New York since 1970. He has also been an adjunct professor of immigration law in law schools in both states.

Pages: 1 2

  • welldoneson

    I think we all know damn well that Western governments will NEVER bring in such requirements. I'm not sure if it's because bureaucrats are afraid moslems will play the race card, or if we as voters are too stupid to elect politicians who will implement such schemes. I can't explain why we already don't do this, especially considering the 9/11 perps were in the U. S. on _expired_ student visas. Seems like a no-brainer. Maybe too many West-hating leftists in positions of power?

    • Steven Laib

      This idea is sound, but does not go far enough. It is my opinion that the majority of "moderates" are sitting on the sidelines waiting to see who looks like a winner before joining the battle. Until the US becomes serious about winning, and destroying the militants root and branch we will never get the "moderates" to help, period.

      • old white guy

        they are just waiting for their side to win. they just don't want to get real dirty yet but they will.

        • bdouglasaf1980

          Absolutely true. We should stop all muslim immigration.

    • PhillipGaley

      "these Muslims pose no direct or immediate threat to our way of life."
      Buddy, the author greatly mis-apprehends the facts of existence; for, as mere mortar is to the bricks which is holds, the poet says: "And which seems but idle show, strengthens and supports the rest.".
      By simple logic of definition, because Islam is aggressive, and not moderate, while here or there might be a lazy Moslem, as a categorical statement, there can be no moderate Moslem.
      Suppose for a moment that, the so-called radical Moslems were to achieve USA dominance, would those so-called moderate Moslems eagerly seek their share of the American Pie: "On, yeah, I was with ya' all the time, just doing what I could, in my own small way."? Ya' think?

      And as to why, as our author speaks: "The failure on the part of Muslim moderates to pressure their own gov", is explained in the same sense of use of reason.

      My question for our author is this:

      Isn't Islam better seen as operating under mere color of religion—and, just when will there have been enough record of anti-social / criminal activity—the world round—to have the thing recognized in law as criminal / terrorist—assets seized, WIRETAPS, etc? When?
      And sure, for those blind among us, if we wish to bridge to Christians, are they chopping and hacking family members heads and hands off, burying alive, stoning, throwing acid in faces, persuading children in suicide, and on—without pause or respite, threatening to rain more mayhem on peaceful populations.

  • Chezwick_Mac

    Mr Retter is confining himself to dealing with the tactic of terrorism, while ignoring the more important strategic objective of Islamization. As Robert Spencer so eloquently stated recently in an address to college students, Bin Ladin and Imam Rauf may disagree on tactics, but they share the same objective, which is the implementation of Sharia world-wide.

    Literally hundreds of millions of Muslims around the globe are proponents of Sharia and it must be understood, advocates of Sharia are NOT moderates, even if they eschew terrorist violence. Terrorism is a threat to our physical security; Sharia is a threat to our culture of freedom…to our way of life.

    • marat1

      Sharia IS pure fascism–under Sharia, an individual can be killed for converting to another religion OR even abandoning Islam. Most horrific, Islamic so-called "clerics" are granted the POWER to call for the death of anyone whatsoever who they deem to be "a threat to Islam." If Priests, Rabbis and Ministers were granted such a power by their faiths/ideologies, I cannot imagine what an uproar there would be. The reality of Sharia being an essential part of Islam, makes me wonder why Islam in the West is granted tax-free status as a "religious" order, rather than a Totalitarian ideology. Sharia runs DIRECTLY in conflict with our Constitution and Bill of Rights and should, rightly, be banned immediately. Don't worry about Muslims "getting angry" about this. They need no excuse whatsoever to get angry–about cartoons or virtually any criticisms that cut too close to reality about what "the REAL Islam" truly is–a form of supremacist Totalitarianism that cloaks itself in the mantel of "religion."

  • posse101

    great idea but this'll never happen. even with a Republican majority in Congress it'll never happen. the press would have a field day excoriating this decision and bringing so much pressure to bear upon it's proponents and "moderates" like John McCain trying to "work together" with the Democrats. what a joke!

    • old white guy

      it is unfortunate but eventually you will have to fight your own to retain your freedom.

      • posse101

        your comment is absolutely spot on. however i see fighting in the streets before i see political courage (from either party) enough to implement a plan like this. and this confusion and in-fighting is just the sort of thing the jihadists want. we spin our wheels long enough over issues like this, or to be more specific, the constant cow towing to political correctness especially by the democrats, will forever drain our resources, stamina and energy in fighting the enemy, and then one day we'll wake up exhausted and spent and the bad guys will be set up in mosques on every Main Street here in America saying they have rights and privileges. oh wait a second… that day is here!

  • ipdfconverter

    I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

  • anny2

    I wii keep attention to your artical

  • SHmuelHaLevi

    Dream pipe. I live amongst hundreds of thousands of islamics and maintain close contacts wih several families. We visit at imes and I teach as a Professor substitute at several of their schools. I know them from close contact.
    At any given time anyone of them, most if not all, will not hesitate to kill me and my family.
    Violence seems to be intrinsic to the majority and it expresses itself in various ways.
    Rage is a stand by condition.
    I have seen vicious clashes between clans in the school yard that would freeze any Western person blood.
    Bunkers to "moderate" islam. We are lucky that some hesitate, that is all.
    Sorry, but if anyone does not see that is playing with his or her life.

    • Steven Laib

      My own experiences and research echo Mr. HaLevi. We are dealing with a primitive, violence based culture. They only understand what they live by.

      If the US was to make an impression in Iraq they would have destroyed every mosque, destroyed every copy of the koran they could find, and then told the people living there that they had two choices; submit or leave. Admittedly, if the situation were reversed it would be submit or die, but I'm not willing to gun down people in cold blood. They are.

    • ajnn

      " have seen vicious clashes between clans in the school yard that would freeze any Western person blood. "

      We seem determined to not acknowledge that cultures can be very different and in the Middle East, they have 'Hatfield-McCoy' clan wars.

      Arab culture is violent and hates the outsider. This is a reality we don't like to acknowledge. Maybe we should start basing our policies on what is true rather than whatb we would like to be true.

      Imposing consequences is a necessary step to helping ourselves deal with the endemic violence of the arab world. Usinf immigration access is a constructive, non-violent policy. It will liikely be helpful.

      • SHmuelHaLevi

        And also to Mr. Laib if I may,
        I fully agree with both of you as far as each of you adress a certain aspect of the problem, and it is a terrific problem.
        Islam will never, ever fit the Peoria lifestyle, not ever. In fact Islam would raze that town to the ground.
        Woe to those that do not understand the dangers intrinsic to the expansion of the cult of destruction.

  • Ezra

    The only reaction to a policy like this, will be to burn more American flags on CNN. Assuming their love of money is like a person in the west is where your policy will fail. Interesting thought anyway.

  • aspacia

    Arafat said Muslim would use the West's liberal laws and demographics to destroy the West.

    Your plan will not work because a moderate Muslim would be murdered in the Middle-East for speaking against the dictators.

  • Challenger

    While a sincere proposal, the plan would accomplish nothing in my opinion. There is no way that "moderate" Muslims will ever have the freedom within their countries to modify the Islamist religious leaders domination over their behavior.. A totalitarian system is not subject to being influenced by those it dominates. Nice thought by the author, but not realistic.

  • tagalog

    There's another reason why moderate Muslims don't speak en masse against terrorism. There are the Muslims who are standing pat while they see how things play out. My speculation is that those people are the majority among "moderate" Muslims. They're watching what's happening in order to decide which way they will jump.

    Denying people visas to the U.S. when their countries play host to terrorists will just make them angry. It will be another example of the Great Satan acting vindictively against innocent people. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be done; it just means that it won't accomplish the goal of getting the moderates to join in the struggle against Muslim terrorism.

    • Don

      You are right on target! There's no such thing as a "moderate" muslim. They either R one or they ain't one.

  • pierre

    the islamist worm is in the fruit, everywhere.

  • jacob

    According to TAGALOG, shutting the door on people of these countries will make them
    May I ask him whether he feels good old soon to be USMA (M for Muslim if the prevalent idiocy from the White House on down is not curbed) is a sovereign country or, on the contrary, IT SHOULD BEND OVER BACKWARDS TO THE WHIMS OF EVERY SINGLE BANANA REPUBLIC OF THE WORLD….

    One thing I know is that he who is made ot of sugar, ends up eaten by the ants and once and for all, to keep very present, that every practicing Muslim is a terrorist, because this is what has been hammered into his head from craddle to grave and it is
    what his "religion" expects from him and that all this mermaid song abot moderate Muslims is at best, wishful thinking…

    Just hope and pray we don't see another WTC or similar happening, as the I TOLD YOU SO WON'T SUFFICE and no one can predict the backlash….

    • tagalog

      I don't think Muhammed Ali is a terrorist. He's just an aging guy who's a little punchdrunk who's trying to enjoy his declining years.

  • Ret. Marine

    There is no such creature as a "moderate" in the meaning of being a muslim. They are either true to the core of being a muslim, or they are simply fooling no one including the other muslims who are currently killing more muslims than Americans.
    This is a good plan but, we as a people know full well the current regime neither has a spine for such logic or the political will to see it through implementation. These spineless liberals are the very problem which infects this Nation. I agree, we should also bring up the committee on un American activities and deport all those who wold disagree with being a true Patriot, or American.

  • sflbib

    The problem I see with this idea is taqqiya: there will be the inevitable exception for those who claim they are not Muslim. Then everyone from blacklisted Islamic country X who wishes to come to the U.S. will simply claim they are not Muslim.

    • slipperylips

      I doubt they will denounce their religion, even if they are moderates. That would be very dangerous for them.

    • Don

      Yeah, they lie a lot. Part of their "religion".

  • Golden Bear

    Should have happened on 9-12-01.

  • Andres de Alamaya

    This was a good learning experience. At the outset I would have backed Mr. Retter's plan but after reading all the comments I returned to reality which is that you can't negotiate with rattle snakes which regards all other creatures an enemy and strike out at enemies or with a people whose minds are programmed in infancy to regard us as an enemy to be subjugated.

  • Lance

    Islamic terror is the tree that grows from its roots anchored deeply in the fundamental texts of Islam–the Qur’an, the Hadiths, the Sira, and in the life and actions of Muhammad, who Muslims regard as the “Perfect Man” whose actions are to be emulated in every respect. Thus, today’s “peaceful,” “moderate Muslim,” who may have been born into a Muslim nation or family but who, right now, is uninterested in being an observant Muslim can, at any time, rediscover Islam and decide to become observant, and for observant Muslims, as Muhammad Badi, the new head of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Ikhwan, recently said,

    “Arab and Muslim regimes are betraying their people by failing to confront the Muslim's real enemies, not only Israel but also the United States. Waging jihad against both of these infidels is a commandment of Allah that cannot be disregarded.”

    “All Muslims are required by their religion to fight: "They crucially need to understand that the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death just as the enemies pursue life."

    “The United States is immoral, doomed to collapse, and "experiencing the beginning of its end and is heading towards its demise." ( )

    When you couple this with the fact that Islam allows and in some circumstances commands Muslims use “”Holy Deception” i.e. the deceptive tactics of Takiyya (dissimulation i.e. lying) and Kitman (withholding, or partial truth) when Muslims deal with unbelievers, when employing these deceptive tactics will safeguard or promote the interest of a Muslim or of Islam, it is impossible to believe anything that Muslims might say is really “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. ” Or, as newly made U.S. citizen Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square bomber, said to the judge at his trial who asked him about the citizenship oath he recently took to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, “I lied.”

    Moreover, as the Hadiths have it, for Muslims in majority unbeliever countries “we [Muslims] smile in the faces of some people [i.e. unbelievers] although our hearts curse them.”

    Thus, we unbelievers can never really be sure that “peaceful” and “moderate Muslims” are really “peaceful” or “moderate,” or that they will remain so. Since this is the case, the only safe policy is a immediate and permanent halt to all further immigration to the U.S. by Muslims, as well as policies that make it extremely easy for Muslims settled in the U.S.–told by the Saudi teaching materials used in their mosques here in the U.S. to regard themselves “as on a mission behind enemy lines”—to return to their “House of Islam,” but very difficult and uncomfortable for them to stay here in the U.S., in what Muslims term our unbeliever’s “House of War.”

  • Jusuf

    Good idea, but I prefer from now on people must declare his/her religion on any identification and document. By doing this, government and people would know and indirectly would minimize the radicals

    • Robert

      That is what Muslim countries like Egypt, already do. I don't think that is a good idea.

  • Stephen_Brady

    The politician who does this will be destroyed. First, by the media. Then, by the opposition. That's just the way politics works in this country, today.

    I wish that someone would do what the author wants, and I will push for it, as we head into the November elections, and in the two years between now and 2012. But I wouldn't hold my breath.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Here is where your analysis fails, the notion that the entire Islamic civilization can be divided into so-called radical Muhammadans and so-called moderate Muhammadans is besides being extremely racist, very ludicrous as well. In your scenario since you don’t define what are radical Muhammadans and what are moderate Muhammadans, one has to assume that Muhammadans that are violent jihadists must be deemed so-called radical Muhammadans and the Muhammadans that are not violent yet must be deemed so-called moderate Muhammadans.

    However, your scenario fails because it fails to take into account that the vast overwhelming amount of jihad that takes place in the world today takes place via non-violent stealth and deceptive means or what the Muhammadans call civilization jihad. Hence, those devout Muhammadans that are civilizational jihadists, which makes up the majority of the Muhammadans you identify as moderate, share the same exact goal as the violent jihadists, and it would be ludicrous, not to mention slanderous under Sharia law, for them to stand up to condemn their fellow jihadists.

    In other words, you don’t understand Islam, Sharia law, and Islamic society and thus like our military has done for the past 9 years, you are basing your solutions on stupid and naïve assumptions like the vast overwhelming majority of Muhammadans are moderates, for instance, and just like our military has miserably failed for the past 9 years, your solutions will inevitably fail as well.

  • ajnn

    An excellent idea; but just try to implement it !!! "Collective Punishment" and "Racial right wing racist. will rise up to brand you a souless, right-wing, racist.

    Look at israel. Closing a border to people who spend each day trying to figure out how to kill more Israelis is labeled, "collective punishment".

    "Racial profiling" is now a four-letter-word wielded by people who don't actually know what it is.

    Excellent idea. If you run for office, I will vote for you. I will send you money. I will pass out flyers for you. But I will believe that you are unelectable.

  • ajnn

    It is non-violent and might empower more moderate persons in these countries.

    Please keep your 'Nazi stuff' to yourself. it is silly in this context.

    • guest

      um, nothing silly about pointing out that the side that includes kooks who get off dressing like Nazis also loves the idea of preventing the entire population of entire countries from traveling to certain other countries as a way to fight terrorism. You guys think big, that's for sure, but in all the wrong ways.

  • Bill

    The idea is totally logical. However, it first requires redefining our problem. "Terrorism," and "Jihad" are effects of the problem, and the real problem starts with a cultural philosophy that can and may destroy the body of the hosts – Western countries and their value of personal freedom. When those who have lived with this anti-freedom and anti-intellectual system for thousands of years (ie before the Koran) resettle in socially developed lands, and bring values of "death" and "fear" and "burqas" with them, we have an "epidemic." On a global scale, we call it a "pandemic." Once we are able to see the bigger picture, and understand that our "survival" is at stake, we will know what the choices are. A recent example, the Swine Flu of 2009:

    "Russia, Hong Kong and Taiwan said they would quarantine visitors showing symptoms of the virus amid a surging global concern about a possible pandemic."

    "China's quarantine authority issued an emergency notice on Saturday night requiring people to report flu-like symptoms at ports of entry when coming from swine flu-affected places. The ministries of health and agriculture say they are closely monitoring the situation."

    "Check-in staff at Heathrow and other main British airports are vetting passengers for possible symptoms and turning away those suspected of being infected. Some countries, including Thailand, Egypt and China have installed thermal body scanners to identify passengers with fever."

    Mankind is a life form and organism like others. It's time to redefine the problem.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    What is so insidious about Muhammadan immigration and the excess baggage that goes along with it is that to accommodate it not only is the federal government forced to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to protect the homeland, but also everyone is forced to endure new security inconveniences and indignities when we go to airports or government buildings too. On top of that we must also now restrict our freedoms such as the freedom of speech and the freedom of expression because of Muhammadan sensitivities too.

    Look at Europe, everywhere mass Muhammadan immigration has occurred the majority of the Muhammadan immigrants have refused to assimilate and integrate and have formed Muhammadan no-go zones ruled by Sharia in direct contravention to the laws of the states in which they reside. Not only that but they have disproportionately committed most of the crimes as well. Hence, it would be incredibly naïve for us not to assume that the same exact phenomenon that has happened throughout Europe won’t happen in America as well. The reality is Muhammadans don’t migrate to assimilate and integrate. Instead, they migrate to one day dominate and subjugate. Are we supposed to ignore all of this and continue pretending it isn’t true?

    Meanwhile, what do Muhammadans have to contribute to our society in return for our multicultural tolerance other than honor killings, genital mutilation, institutionalized oppression of women, wife beating, child marriage, institutionalized prejudice against all non-Muslim dhimmis, oppression of gays, bigotry against Jews, riots against Israel, riots against Muhammad cartoons, riots against any and all criticism of Islam, legitimate or otherwise, Islamic supremacism, disproportional amount of crimes committed by Muhammadans, refusal to assimilate and integrate, no-go zones, backwardness, barbarianism, work place accommodations for prayer and Muhammadan holy days, constant and incessant demands for Sharia Law, false and non-existent claims of discrimination, incessant claims of victimhood, subversion to remove all obstacles to the eventual imposition of Sharia Law, intimidation, threats of terrorism, and domestic Islamic terrorist attacks.

    Who made the unhinged decision to allow mass Muhammadan immigration into America in the first place? I mean if the changes to our society are going to be so costly and profound, how can our elites get away with making the decision to allow Muhammadan immigration without our consent? I would like to know how that decision was made and who was behind it, but most of all I want to know what it will take to reverse that decision.

    Finally, if anyone is going to suggest that I’m a racist and a bigot for bring up this sensitive subject, then be prepared to point out what about the above is not true, and why it is considered racist and bigoted to state the obvious.

    • Ret. Marine

      Look no further than the Jimmmmaaaaah high I'm a peanut picken farmer" Carter. Included in this mix was the individuals assign to immigration under the Klinton admin. These traitors rightly need be hung for their effort to legalize the jihad against the United State of America.

  • SenatorMark4

    Your belief that it is a simple idea to simply determine "that a country gives 'safe haven' to terrorists" you'd simply revoke abilty to get visas… YOU'RE DRUNK! There is no way to agree on this. Hamas is getting millions from us in Gaza and we can't see they MIGHT have terrorist sypathies? There is a way to spread freedom and deny visas to tyrannies, and the populations that support them, but it is not "simple". We need a black letter measure of freedom, like: First Amendment, Second Amendment, and Article 1, Section 2 (tax man voted EVERY 2 years!) and simplty insist, via law, that no grants, aid, VISAS, or military assistance can be given from free people's tax receipts to those that don't support FREEDOM using these as a base measure. Without this, how simple has it been to keep GE from doing business with IRAN? Hasn't Dearborn, MI. shown some slight inclination to support terrorists? We can fight against those that deny freedom and democracy but we can't fight by letting government workers decide who is a terrorist and who isn't because they've shown NO ABILITY to discern this.

  • Seamystic

    Only a full out War against Islam and its total defeat is now acceptable. There are no moderate Islam or Muslims, as they must follow Mohammed's words to a tee, or if not, under pressure from their Mullahs they will be declared Apostates, and fair game for the Death Penalty by their kin.

  • clarityrising

    First of all "Guest" is a moron. He forgets (or is too stupid to know, most likely) that Naziism is a Leftist ideology, where they dress up for real and not fun, so it falls on his side of the fence. Second, even if the U.S. had the balls to do such a thing, it would not even be conceivable until we got of foreign oil and relied on our own energy supplies.

  • Michael Allen

    This plan is logical and makes perfect sense. That's why it will never happen.

  • Michael Allen

    And you are yet another spineless fool who doens't think our nation has the right to protect itself. When the next terrorist attack occurs it will be the fault of people who think like you.

  • exmuslim

    Please wake up people of the world before the next world war and invasive forces of Islam come and kill all

  • Jim Johnson

    In Saudi Arabia there are anti Islam Muslims. They blame the Religion of Islam for keeping the Arabs and other Muslims backward with respect to the western world( including the pacific rim as part of the western world). When the grade schools in Saudi Arabia spend 75 % of their class time studying the Quran that doesn't leave much time for the 3 Rs.
    Like any other political situation of a similar nature the one most alienated from Islam are the non citizen Arabs living in another Islamic Arab country. They are often discriminated against. Some Yemeni have lived in Saudi Arabia for many years and never were allowed to become citizens. If educated they seemed to hold the greatest antagonism to Islam.
    Before the Over Throw of the Shah there were Shia in the Eastern Provinces who were like wise alienated. After the revolt it was hard to talk to them except for a few. Those I could talk to were still mostly progressive ( not in the left wing sense).
    We have bungled opportunities. We could have strengthened the Northern Alliance even before 911. They had only two tanks that badly needed a tune up. Had they been better armed and otherwise supplied they could have given the Taliban and the Al Qaeda a run for their money. When the Tehran students were protesting we could have strengthened them.
    Right now we could try to create disharmony in the ranks. Envy and jealousy exist every where. It even exists in Saudi Arabia against the princes and their arrogant ways.

    To be sure countries like Egypt and Jordan have rulers who do not like the extremists at all.

    Remember Turkey was less hostile to Israel before democracy. Pakistan was a little better ally before democracy than after.

  • wesley69

    The Philosopher King-in-chief would never go along with such a program. The problem, I see, is if a country was labeled as sympatric to terrorists and your sanction was imposes, how could we be assured that those on visas would go? Personally, if terrorist is being done by Arab Islamic Terrorists, I will profile Arabs as a whole. What is more important, the security of your society and its survival or inconveniences that may be imposed on Arabs, but help protect our society? Right now, Mr. O and his cronies have helped paint a bulls-eye on the back of every American. I pray the terrorists will never hit the center.

    All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Thomas Jefferson

  • Consular Officer

    Interesting idea… I wonder…

    Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha! This will NEVER happen! I work for the Four-Eyed Circus (aka Snake Department) and this outfit will never, never, never, ever support an idea like this. The mantra since Clinton disgraced the office of the President has been "everyone needs a visa!" People get promoted for ISSUING visas, not denying them. No matter what kind of scum applies for the visa. (And, no, things would not have been better under Colin Powell. He prevented Consular Affairs from being transferred to where it really belongs – DHS/Customs and Border Protection.) State considers itself these days separate and superior to every other USG agencies, even as it has become easily the most traitorous agency in the USG. I can hardly wait to retire and work for an honorable organization. State was not always so bad. I miss Ronnie and George!

  • Morton Thanatos

    Since there is so much hate and fear on these topics, why not advocate openly for mass executions of anyone we don't like? Mexicans, Arabs, Gays, Liberals, Californians – hey, just pick your targets. Due Process was for the effeminate Founding "Fathers", and 9/11 "changed everything". WE have Guantanamo and our secret prisons and torture now. The Policy for a New American Century had it JUST RIGHT! As Sarah Palin said, "Lock and Load"! As our beloved Sharron Angle put it, this applies to the the politicians we don't like under the protected Second Amendment Remedies. The NRA rules!


  • Fullofflies

    Muslim should shape up according to the country they live…..
    or ship out to their country of origin…..

  • Triple_AAA

    How about an immediate end to ALL muslim immigration? We should not let a single one into our country !! Islam has been at war with us since its inception, therefore we are at war with islam, how the hell can we be allowing the enemy to take a foothold in our country?

  • truebearing

    Wisdom means never trust people who believe, and live by, the great anti-ethic: the end justifies the means. That means Marxists and Muslims can NEVER be trusted as both believe that lying, in all of its forms, is perfectly acceptable and good if it furthers the acquisition of power. How foolish is it to trust someone who adheres to a religion the sacred text of which openly encourages deception, duplicity, and murder?

    M. Scott Peck wrote a book entitled "People of the Lie". It is about evil as a human reality. Marxism and Islam are religions of the lie.

    What is the antithesis to these evil religions? Christianity.

    What religion, or ideology is the number one threat to both Marxism and Islam?Christianity.

    This is the battle between good and evil, and we better achieve clarity before it's too late. Islam and Marxism, in all of their forms, are cultures of death. They are Mortacracies that will not endure freedom or opposition.

  • Gamaliel Isaac

    We give safe haven to terrorists and their training camps. Look at Islamberg!

  • WeMustResist

    Daniel Retter's suggestion is very sensible. Countries such as Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan should be quarantined. Once you leave a Western country for those destinations you should not be allowed back into a Western country. Any new arrivals from those countries who have never been to the West before should not be allowed in. The main objection to such a measure is the high volume of traffic that already exists. In other words we are in a bad habit so lets stick with it. That is a stupid objection and there is no better objection. The safety of the public ought to be the first priority for governments that love their people. Unfortunately our governments are all manned by stuffed shirts who are frightened of anything that looks new or aggressive.

  • Miguel

    What you'd better watch than Muslims themselves is how American courts and local politicians allow drift toward Sharia law.

    One thing Muslims don't understand is that Americans are judicious users of violence. Muslims are accustomed to the cowardly approach: lying, stealth, mass murder–not to mano a mano confrontation.

    Sooner or later, if they try to bring their violence here, they will experience severe retribution, not from the government, but from individuals.

  • J.S.

    Here's a "head's up" — terrorists don't care about Infidel laws. Do you really think that designating country X as "pro-terrorist" and curtailing visas is going to stop terrorists? (it's almost laughable). Like they can't enter the country from Canada…or Mexico…or any other nation…then move into the United States. And, under your "system" all they'd have to do is travel to one of your Arab "good" countries (and which one would that be, pray tell? Saudi Arabia?), then get a visa, then travel to the U.S. (probably on an all-expenses paid grant courtesy of Obama, personally signed, along with an autographed pic of Hilliary at the State Dept.)

  • flaedo

    l would go the blanket ban on all muslim immigration into the West until they stop targeting us and killing and maiming Christians in their own countries. End of story, no discussion no debate not negotiable.

  • Vivi Andersen



    Especially when we are thinking as You :

    then we have to bow our heads and kiss the arab-hand – just like Barak Hussein Obama.

  • Tony Ibbott

    The causes and the solutions of this whole mess, are all explained in one book: Atlas Shrugged.