Paul Ryan: Trump’s Muslim Ban Not Reflective Of GOP And U.S. Principles

House Speaker Paul Ryan may still be backing the candidacy of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, but the two top-tier Republicans continue to butt heads over Trump’s call for a temporary ban on Muslim immigration into the United States.
On Monday, Trump reiterated a broad, religion-based immigration strategy as the best way to protect against future terror attacks. (That’s despite the fact that Orlando shooter Omar Mateen was a New York City-born American citizen.)
Asked to respond Tuesday morning, Ryan said he stood by previous criticism of Trump’s stance. “I do not think a Muslim ban is in our country’s interest. I do not think it is reflective of our principles, not just as a party but as a country. I think the smarter way to go, in all respects, is to have a security test and not a religious test.”
NPR.org: http://www.npr.org/2016/06/14/482018791/paul-ryan-trumps-muslim-ban-not-reflective-of-gop-and-u-s-principles

Clinton Warns Against ‘Inflammatory, Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

The day after the deadliest mass shooting in American history, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton warned against the possibility of future attacks and went after Donald Trump for “inflammatory” rhetoric.
“The threat is metastasizing,” Clinton said in a speech in Cleveland. “We saw this in Paris, and we saw it in Brussels. We face a twisted ideology and poisoned psychology that inspires the so-called lone wolves: radicalized individuals who may or may not have contact and direction from any formal organization.”
NPR.org: http://www.npr.org/2016/06/13/481896759/clinton-the-threat-is-metastasizing

Trump Calls To Ban Immigration From Countries With ‘Proven History Of Terrorism’

Responding to the Orlando shootings in a New Hampshire speech Monday, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump used the appearance to expand on his previous call to temporarily ban all Muslims from immigrating to the United States.
“The only reason the killer was in America in the first place is because we allowed his family to come here,” Trump said. “That is a fact, and a fact we need to talk about.”
NPR.org: http://www.npr.org/2016/06/13/481910989/trump-expands-immigration-ban-to-countries-with-proven-history-of-terrorism

Partner of San Bernardino Victim Urges Tolerance of Muslims

A man whose boyfriend was killed in the San Bernardino terror attack criticized Donald Trump’s suggestion that Muslims be banned from entering the U.S. and encouraged tolerance in the wake of the shootings.
Speaking to students Monday in a “Terrorism in the 21st Century” class at California State University, San Bernardino, Ryan Reyes said his anger has shifted from the attack to how the nation has responded. He said the Muslim community should not be blamed for the actions of radical groups.
“A ban on anybody based on something like that, I was appalled that that notion even came up,” Reyes said of Trump’s Muslim ban proposal.

US Muslims draw inspiration from Ali’s fight for his faith

DETROIT — Even in his final months, Muhammad Ali was speaking out on behalf of Islam, the religion he so famously embraced in the 1960s by changing his name and refusing to fight in the Vietnam War.
In December, the boxing legend issued a statement criticizing Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the United States. Ali called on fellow Muslims to “stand up to those who use Islam to advance their own personal agenda.”
Ali, who died Friday at 74, endured public scorn when he joined the Nation of Islam as a young athlete. Decades later, long after he had achieved worldwide renown, he kept advocating for Muslims in the U.S. who felt their religion made them political targets.

GOP worries rise amid hostile Trump comments on Latinos and Muslims

A growing number of Republican lawmakers and strategists fear that Donald Trump’s hostile remarks about minorities and his un­or­tho­dox strategy have imperiled his campaign at the end of a five-week head start on Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton that they hoped would fortify him heading into the general election.
Their concerns increased again Sunday after Trump said he thought a Muslim judge might treat him unfairly because he wants to temporarily ban most foreign Muslims from entering the country. The remark was an expansion on repeated assertions over the past week that an American-born judge overseeing a fraud case against him should recuse himself because of his “Mexican heritage.”
“If it were a Muslim judge, would you also feel like they wouldn’t be able to treat you fairly because of that policy of yours?” host John Dickerson asked on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”  “It’s possible, yes. Yeah. That would be possible, absolutely,” Trump replied.
 

Could a Muslim Judge Be Neutral to Donald Trump? He Doesn’t Think So

Donald J. Trump said Sunday that a Muslim judge might have trouble remaining neutral in a lawsuit against him, extending his race-based criticism of the jurist overseeing the case to include religion and opening another path for Democrats who have criticized him sharply for his remarks.
The comments, in an interview with John Dickerson, the host of CBS’s “Face the Nation,” come amid growing disapproval from fellow Republicans over his attacks on Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel, a federal judge in California overseeing a suit against the defunct Trump University, whose impartiality Mr. Trump questioned based on the judge’s Mexican heritage.
Mr. Dickerson asked Mr. Trump if, in his view, a Muslim judge would be similarly biased because of the Republican presumptive nominee’s call for a ban on Muslim immigrants. “It’s possible, yes,” Mr. Trump said. “Yeah. That would be possible. Absolutely.”

Germany’s Donald Trump moment: The AfD ahead of crucial state elections

February 5, 2016

Frauke Petry, chairwoman of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party opined last week that due to the continued influx of immigrants police ought to use firearms in order to defend the German border. In an interview with the local newspaper Mannheimer Morgen, Petry asserted that “[n]o policeman wants to shoot at a refugee. I don’t want to either. But part of an ultima ratio is the use of armed force.” The party’s vice-chairwoman Beatrix von Storch reaffirmed this statement in a somewhat more blunt fashion on her Facebook page: “Whoever does not accept the STOP [sign] at our borders is an attacker. And we need to defend ourselves against attacks”. Questioned by a commenter whether she would use weapons to prevent women and children from crossing the border, von Storch only replied with a curt “yes”.

After the leading AfD women boldly asserted that their suggestions were covered by existing law, they subsequently issues retractions of their statements in the face of massive public backlash. Yet while criticism of Petry’s and von Storch’s statements was fierce, arguably it did little to harm the AfD’s current political momentum. As communication scientist Frank Brettschneider contended in an interview with the news outlet Tagesschau, the AfD draws its strength from obtaining media attention through conscious provocation. Brettschneider drew an explicit parallel to Donald Trump: outrageous statements lead to condemnation on the part of the societal mainstream, yet they buttress popularity in that sector of the population that is attracted to this discourse.

So far, the AfD’s calculation appears to be working: Following Petry’s and von Storch’s statements, the AfD reached a new high of 12 per cent in the national polls. At the centre of attention are the three states of Baden-Württemberg, Rhineland-Palatinate, and Saxony-Anhalt where new state parliaments and prime ministers will be elected in mid-March. Here, attempts to exclude the AfD from the televised debates ahead of the elections have led to the cancellation of these debates and seemingly only strengthened the AfD’s position.

Links:

Frauke Petry’s original statement: http://www.morgenweb.de/sie-konnen-es-nicht-lassen-1.2620328 (in German)

Beatrix von Storch’s comments: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/fluechtlingskrise/beatrix-von-storch-afd-vizechefin-will-polizei-sogar-auf-kinder-schiessen-lassen-14044186.html (in German)

Interview with Frank Brettschneider: http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/interview-brettschneider-afd-101.html (in German)

AfD at a new all-time high in national polls: http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/deutschlandtrend/index.html (in German)

New Poll Finds Anti-Muslim Sentiment Frighteningly High

Call it Trumpism, an ad-hoc term for the cresting wave of white Republican resentment that Donald Trump has been surfing like Duke Kahanamoku. Some find it fascinating. Late-night comics like Stephen Colbert have been treating it like it’s hilarious.

But a lot of people take Mr. Trump completely seriously, and support him fervently. So when do we start being frightened for this country?

A poll came out today. It’s just one poll in one Southern state, North Carolina, by one polling outfit (Public Policy Polling, or PPP) with Democratic Party ties, asking questions of a few hundred Republican primary voters.

But still, these results:

“Do you think a Muslim should ever be allowed to be President of the United States, or not?

A Muslim should be allowed to be President of the United States: 16 percent

A Muslim should not be allowed to be President of the United States: 72 percent

Not sure: 12 percent”

“Do you think the religion of Islam should be legal or illegal in the United States?

Islam should be legal in the United States: 40 percent

Islam should be illegal in the United States: 40 percent

Not sure: 20 percent”

Do these people know what it means to outlaw Muslim worship? Do they teach history in the North Carolina schools? Do they know what would happen if we closed mosques, arrested worshipers and prayer leaders, imposed religious tests for public office? Are these overwrought questions, or do the ugly answers in this poll portend something seriously wrong: an outbreak of a deadly fever this country has seen many times before?

Rep. Ron Paul To Jay Leno: Rep. Michele Bachmann ‘Hates Muslims’

Rep. Ron Paul may stick to advancing his own positions during debates and letting others do the sniping, but he took a detour on last night’s Tonight Show in a rapid-fire round where Jay Leno asked him to comment on each candidate in term. While he had some nice things to say about Jon Huntsman, his reactions to Newt Gingrich and Rep. Michele Bachmann were particularly harsh, the latter of which he noted “she doesn’t like Muslims… she wants to go get ‘em.”
As it was a quick round of questions, Leno moved on to “thoughtful person” Jon Huntsman before going on to Rick Santorum, who Leno noted that it appeared “gay people, it’s the end of the world for him.” “Gay people and Muslims,” Rep. Paul added.

The rest of the interview centered around Rep. Paul’s semi-feud with Donald Trump, who Rep. Paul noted, somewhat jokingly, that “he was very much offended [by me], so I’m getting a little bit worried,” and whether he would consider a third party run, a question he defined was “way premature.”