Archive for the ‘terrorismo’ Category

França se livra de quem é contra terrorista – Toda a imprensa do mundo aplaudiu a eleição do candidato dos terroristas

09/05/2017

18301720_1342448125846798_3322404719260521751_n

18402808_867671926713645_8835653015294252748_n

C-zZ7oEXgAIwdln

Estudantes Brasileiros também são recrutados para o terrorismo petralha

27/04/2017

31 841 vues

Terrorism is child abuse!

#TerrorismIsChildAbuse

GUERRA CIVIL NA AMÉRICA CRIADA PELOS DEMOCRATAS

29/03/2017
TEXTO E TRADUÇÃO DO ALUYSIO AMORIN
Recomendo portanto que leiam o artigo que segue e compartilhem. A informação é a principal arma para evitar o pior. Fiz a tradução do inglês com o apoio de tradutor online e posterior copydesk. Mas meus conhecimentos do inglês não são suficientes para uma tradução de primeira linha. Continuo estudando, mas não é moleza. Leiam:
A GUERRA CIVIL ESTÁ AQUI
Uma guerra civil começou.
Esta guerra civil é muito diferente da última. Não há cargas de canhões ou cavalaria. A esquerda não quer se separar. Quer governar. Os conflitos políticos tornam-se guerras civis quando um lado se recusa a aceitar a autoridade existente. A esquerda rejeitou todas as formas de autoridade que não controla.
A esquerda rejeitou o resultado das duas últimas eleições presidenciais ganhas pelos republicanos. Rejeita a autoridade judiciária da Suprema Corte quando as decisões não estão de acordo com sua agenda. Rejeita a autoridade legislativa do Congresso quando não é dominada pela esquerda.
Rejeitou a Constituição há tanto tempo que dificilmente menciona.
Foi para a autoridade executiva unilateral total sob Obama. E agora cabe aos Estados decidirem unilateralmente quais leis seguirão. (Enquanto isso envolve desafiar as leis de imigração sob Trump, não seguindo-as sob Obama.) Foi para a autoridade sacrossanta do Senado quando ele manteve a maioria. Em seguida, criticou o Senado como uma instituição ultrapassada quando os republicanos assumiram.
Foi para Obama desafiar as ordens dos juízes federais, não importa o quão bem fundamentado na lei existente, e serve para os juízes federais anularem qualquer ordem por Trump em qualquer motivo que seja. Foi para Obama punir os denunciantes, mas agora, para minar o governo de dentro, tornou-se “patriótico”.
Não há nenhuma forma de autoridade legal que a esquerda aceite como uma instituição permanente. Só utiliza formas de autoridade seletivamente quando as controla. Mas quando os funcionários do governo recusam as ordens do governo devidamente eleito porque sua lealdade é para uma ideologia cuja agenda está em conflito com o presidente e o Congresso, isso não é ativismo, protesto, política ou desobediência civil; É traição.
Depois de perder o Congresso, a esquerda consolidou sua autoridade na Casa Branca. Depois de perder a Casa Branca, a esquerda mudou seu centro de autoridade para juízes federais e funcionários do governo não eleitos. Cada derrota levou os democratas radicalizados a mudarem de instituições mais democráticas para instituições menos democráticas.
Isso não é apenas hipocrisia. Esse é um pecado político comum. Hypocrites manobra dentro do sistema. A esquerda não tem lealdade ao sistema. Ela não aceita leis diferentes das ditadas por sua ideologia.

LOUCURA IDEOLÓGICA
Os democratas tornaram-se radicalizados pela esquerda. Isso não significa apenas que eles perseguem todos os tipos de políticas ruins. Isso significa que a sua primeira e mais importante fidelidade é uma ideologia, não a Constituição, nem o nosso país nem o nosso sistema de governo. Todos esses são apenas para ser usado como veículos para a sua ideologia.
É por isso que o compromisso tornou-se impossível.
Nosso sistema de governo foi projetado para permitir que diferentes grupos negociassem suas diferenças. Mas essas diferenças deveriam basear-se em encontrar interesses compartilhados. O mais profundo desses interesses compartilhados era o de um país comum baseado em certos valores civilizacionais. A esquerda substituiu essas idéias fundadoras por noções e princípios radicalmente diferentes. Rejeitou a importância primordial do país. Como resultado, ela compartilha pouco em termos de interesses ou valores.
Em vez disso, recuou para enclaves culturais urbanos e suburbanos, onde centralizou enormes quantidades de poder, desconsiderando os interesses e valores da maior parte do país. Se os considera, está convencido de que eles desaparecerão em breve para serem substituídos por imigrantes que se conformam e esquerdistas universitários que formam uma maioria demográfica permanente para sua agenda.
Mas não poderia esperar tanto tempo porque é animada pela convicção de que reforçar suas idéias é urgente e inevitável. E assim transformou o que tinha sido uma transição escondida em uma ruptura aberta.
Na transição oculta, suas figuras de autoridade haviam seqüestrado a lei e todos os cargos políticos que ocupavam para perseguir sua agenda ideológica. A esquerda tinha usado seu vasto poder cultural para fabricar um consenso que estava lentamente transitando o país dos valores americanos para seus valores e agendas. O direito tinha-se revelado largamente impotente diante de um programa que corrompia e subvertia de dentro.
A esquerda teve enorme êxito neste aspecto. Foi tão bem sucedida que perdeu todo o senso de proporção e decidiu abrir suas opiniões e lançar uma luta de poder político depois de perder uma eleição.
Os democratas não estavam mais sendo injetados lentamente com ideologia de esquerda. Em vez disso, a esquerda assumiu abertamente e exigiu lealdade às fronteiras abertas, à política de identidade e ao fanatismo ambiental. O êxodo dos eleitores acabou com os democratas em grande parte do que a esquerda considerou país de passagem aérea.
A esquerda respondeu às derrotas democráticas recuando mais profundamente em instituições não democráticas, seja a burocracia ou a mídia corporativa, ao mesmo tempo que dobra seu radicalismo político. Agora, está desafiando abertamente o resultado de uma eleição nacional usando uma coalizão de burocratas, corporações, funcionários não eleitos, celebridades e repórteres que se baseiam fora de seus enclaves culturais e políticos.
A esquerda respondeu a uma eleição perdida construindo “cidades e estados santuários” transformando assim uma secessão cultural e ideológica em uma secessão legal. Mas enquanto os secessionistas querem ser deixados sozinhos autoritários querem que todos sigam suas leis. A esquerda é um movimento autoritário que quer cumprimento total com seus ditames com punições severas para aqueles que desobedecem.
A esquerda descreve suas ações como princípios. Mas, mais precisamente, eles são ideológicos. Funcionários de vários níveis de governo rejeitaram a autoridade do Presidente dos Estados Unidos, do Congresso e da Constituição porque estes estão em desacordo com sua ideologia radical. Os juízes dissimularam essa rejeição na lei. Prefeitos e governadores nem sequer fingem que suas ações são legais.
As escolhas desta guerra civil são dolorosamente claras.
Podemos ter um sistema de governo baseado em torno da Constituição com representantes democraticamente eleitos. Ou podemos ter um baseado nos princípios ideológicos da esquerda em que todas as leis e processos, incluindo as eleições e a Constituição, são folhas de figo para reforçar a justiça social.
Mas não podemos ter ambos.

O QUE PODE ACONTECER?
Algumas guerras civis acontecem quando um conflito político não pode ser resolvido no nível político. Os realmente maus acontecem quando um conflito político irresolúvel se combina com um conflito cultural insolúvel.
Isso é o que temos agora.
A esquerda deixou claro que não aceitará a autoridade legítima do nosso sistema de governo. Não aceitará o resultado das eleições. Não aceita essas coisas porque estão em desacordo com sua ideologia e porque representam a vontade de grandes porções do país que desprezam.
A questão é o que vem a seguir.
A última vez em torno de tensões crescentes começou a explodir em confrontações violentas entre extremistas de ambos os lados. Esses extremistas foram elogiados por moderados que integram seus pontos de vista. O primeiro presidente republicano foi eleito e rejeitado. As tensões políticas levaram ao conflito e depois à guerra civil.
A esquerda não acredita na secessão. É um movimento político autoritário que perdeu a autoridade democrática. Há agora uma luta de poder político em andamento entre os funcionários democraticamente eleitos e o mecanismo antidemocrático de governo auxiliado por um punhado de juízes e eleitos locais.
O que isso realmente significa é que existem dois governos concorrentes; O governo legal e um anti-governo traidor da esquerda. Se este conflito político progride, as agências e indivíduos em todos os níveis de governo serão convidados a demonstrar sua fidelidade a estes dois governos concorrentes. E isso pode transformar-se rápida e explosivamente em uma verdadeira guerra civil.
Não há sinal de que a esquerda entenda ou esteja preocupada com as implicações do conflito que iniciou. E há poucos sinais de que os democratas entendam adequadamente a estrada perigosa que a esquerda radical está atraindo para eles. A esquerda pressupõe que os vencedores de uma eleição democrática recuarão, em vez de ficarem sob sua autoridade. Não está preparada para a possibilidade de que a democracia não morra na escuridão.
As guerras civis terminam quando um lado é forçado a aceitar a autoridade do outro. A esquerda espera que todos aceitem sua autoridade ideológica. Os conservadores esperam que a esquerda aceite a autoridade constitucional. O conflito ainda é político e cultural. Está sendo travado na mídia e no governo. Mas se nenhum dos lados retroceder, então ele vai além das palavras, pois ambos os lados dão ordens contraditórias.
A esquerda é um movimento traiçoeiro. Os democratas se tornaram uma organização traiçoeira quando caíram sob a influência de um movimento que rejeita nosso sistema de governo, suas leis e suas eleições. Agora sua traição está chegando à tona. Eles estão envolvidos em uma luta pelo poder contra o governo. Isso não é protesto. Não é ativismo. A velha traição dos anos sessenta chegou à idade. Uma guerra civil começou.
Este é um conflito primordial entre um sistema totalitário e um sistema democrático. Seu resultado determinará se seremos uma nação livre ou uma nação de escravos. Click here to read the original in English

Mais proibição – Eu sou do tempo do É PROIBIDO PROIBIR

27/03/2017
Notícias STFImprimir

Quarta-feira, 22 de março de 2017

Partido pede que escolas de todo o país sejam obrigadas a coibir bullying homofóbico

O Partido Socialismo e Liberdade (PSOL) ajuizou Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade (ADI 5668), na qual pede que o Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) dê interpretação conforme a Constituição Federal ao Plano Nacional de Educação (aprovado pela Lei 13.005/2014) para reconhecer o dever constitucional das escolas públicas e particulares de prevenir e coibir o bullying homofóbico, consistente em discriminações por gênero, identidade de gênero e orientação sexual, bem como de respeitar a identidade de crianças e adolescentes LGBT no ambiente escolar. A lei tem como objetivo dar cumprimento ao artigo 214 da Constituição Federal.

O inciso II do artigo 2º da lei prevê, entre as diretrizes do plano, a superação das desigualdades educacionais, com ênfase na promoção da cidadania e na erradicação de todas as formas de discriminação, de maneira genérica. O plano prevê uma série de metas e estratégias, entre elas o acompanhamento do acesso, permanência e aproveitamento escolar dos beneficiários de programas de transferência de renda, bem como das situações de discriminação, preconceitos e violências na escola, visando ao estabelecimento de condições adequadas para o ensino, em colaboração com as famílias e com órgãos públicos de assistência social, saúde e proteção à infância, adolescência e juventude.

Para o partido, é preciso combater a noção de que a escola funciona como uma espécie de “curso técnico” voltado à aprovação de adolescentes no vestibular ou no Enem. Isso porque, sustenta o PSOL, a escola deve ensinar crianças e adolescentes a conviverem com a diversidade, em uma sociedade plural, e, com isso, a respeitarem pessoas com características distintas das suas. O partido afirma que parlamentares contrários aos direitos humanos da população LGBT conseguiram retirar dos Planos Nacional, Estaduais e Municipais de Educação menções ao enfrentamento das discriminações por gênero, identidade de gênero e orientação sexual também pelas escolas.

“ É preciso que a sociedade em geral e as escolas em particular respeitem essas crianças e adolescentes que não se enquadram na heterossexualidade cisgênera. Ou seja, as crianças e adolescentes que não sentem atração por pessoas do gênero oposto (‘não-heterossexuais’) e que se identificam com o gênero socialmente atribuído a si em razão de sua genitália (‘não-cisgeneridade’). Aqui entra o papel do professor”, afirma o PSOL na ADI, acrescentando que seu papel é, no mínimo, coibir a prática do bullying contra os alunos em geral, com especial atenção a alunos integrantes a minorias e grupos vulneráveis.

O PSOL pede liminar para que escolas públicas e particulares se abstenham de reprimir crianças e adolescentes que manifestem comportamentos entendidos como de pessoas homossexuais, bissexuais, assexuais, travestis, transexuais ou intersexos, respeitando a identidade de gênero de crianças e adolescentes que queiram ser identificadas e tratadas de acordo com o gênero com o qual se identificam.

A ADI foi distribuída ao ministro Edson Fachin.

VP/CR

Processos relacionados
ADI 5668

Muro que vai barrar criminosos porque os invasores se atrevem a pular a cerca já é SUCESSO COMERCIAL

19/03/2017

Esta imagem é apenas uma ilustração fictícia do muro que livrará o povo americano da invasão criminosa na fronteira com o México.

A construção é uma das promessas de campanha do Presidente Donald Trump. Tem o apoio caloroso do povo americano, excetuando a canalhada esquerdista.

O muro proposto pela administração Trump deverá ter pelo menos uns 10 metros de alturas para dissuadir potenciais imigrantes ilegais, informaram funcionários da Segurança Interna.
O Departamento de Alfândega e Proteção de Fronteiras dos Estados Unidos (CBP) iniciou o processo de solicitação de projetos de várias empresas que inclui propostas de design e protótipos do muro proposto pelo Presidente Donald Trump ao longo da fronteira EUA-México, segundo o jornal o Washington Times.
“O projeto do muro deve ser fisicamente imponente em altura”, explicam os funcionários do CBP. A agência disse que o objetivo é ter um muro de 30 pés, mas aceitará propostas de até 18 pés (30 pés equivale a cerca de 10 metros).
Eles também disseram que o muro deve ter pelo menos seis pés de profundidade de forma a impedir eventual passagem subterrânea e alto o suficiente para que ninguém possa escalar a parede sem uma escada.
Deve levar pelo menos uma hora e, idealmente, mais de quatro horas, para fazer um buraco no muro, de forma que os agentes possam impedir qualquer pessoa de terrar arrombá-lo.
O governo descreve que a muro deve ser capaz de resistir a uma marreta, carro jack, picareta, cinzel, ferramentas de impacto operadas a bateria, ferramentas de corte operadas também por também por bateria, tocha Oxy/acetileno ou outros equipamentos manuais semelhantes.
Nos documentos, o CBP diz que do lado dos EUA deve ser “esteticamente agradável” em “cor, textura anti-subida etc., para integrar-se com o ambiente geral”. Não há menção em relação ao lado mexicano no que diz respeito à aparência da muralha.
Cerca de 700 empresas se registraram como potenciais fornecedores para o projeto desde que o CBP começou a analisar propostas de empresas interessadas. Os contratantes têm até 29 de março para apresentar suas propostas para a primeira fase do projeto. (Com informações do site Breitbart – To read in English click here)

O comunismo não é uma doutrina, é um genocídio

18/03/2017

C7ORQCgXwAIUwIj

Tudo que você pensa saiu do tubo – Pensa no que você seria sem o Tubo

13/03/2017

14717151_275101789590859_4925237160240922734_n

Esta é feminista

11/03/2017

17155654_1248127058634896_7094696480885339405_n

Cai 40% o crime de imigração ilegal na fronteira com o México – We have essentially been paying them to invade our nation

09/03/2017

Trump Is Winning Again! Illegal Border Crossings Dropped As A Result Of Trump’s New Executive Order

On Wednesday, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said that the number of people illegally crossing the U.S. southern border has dropped 40 percent in President Trump’s first full month in office.

“The drop in apprehensions shows a marked change in trends,” Kelly said. “Since the administration’s implementation of executive orders to enforce immigration laws, apprehensions and inadmissible activity is trending toward the lowest monthly total in at least the last five years.”

“This change in the trend line is especially significant because CBP historically sees a 10-20 percent increase in apprehensions of illegal immigrants from January to February,” the agency said in a statement. “Instead, this year we saw a drop from 31,578 to 18,762 persons — a 40 percent decline.”

 

This is a wonderful start!! And another great day in the USA!!

“This trend is encouraging because it means many fewer people are putting themselves and their families at risk of exploitation, assault, and injury by human traffickers and the physical dangers of the treacherous journey north,” the statement continued.

President Trump’s tough stance on illegal immigration showed to be very effective. Trump hit the ground running on illegal immigration when he first took office, signing an executive order that authorized the construction of a border wall and increased border security.

“We will remain vigilant to respond to any changes in these trends, as numbers of illegal crossings typically increase between March and May,” Kelly said. “However, the early results show that enforcement matters, deterrence matters, and that comprehensive immigration enforcement can make an impact.”

One of the most effective things our government can do- and should have done long ago, but we only now have the leadership to make it happen– is eliminate all entitlements illegal aliens are receiving. That includes healthcare, housing, and schooling.

We have essentially been paying them to invade our nation.

Combatem o inimigo externo e poupam o inimigo interno

09/03/2017

17022267_420318064989418_4565250656056058452_n

Farsa montada por palestinos para caluniar o povo eleito

08/03/2017

Mais uma farsa exposta.
Muçulmanos explodem um carro em um beco onde não havia ninguém, e logo após a explosão aparecem vários atores maquiados com sangue falso e roupas sujas.
Tudo para que as mídias FAKE NEWS pudessem filmar e vender a notícia falsa ao resto do mundo para nos sensibilizar a abrir as portas do nosso país para eles.

Pause
-1:52

Paramètres visuels supplémentaires

Passer en Mode Regarder et DéfilerAfficher en plein écran

Remettre le son

134 552 vues

Mais uma farsa exposta.
Muçulmanos explodem um carro em um beco onde não havia ninguém, e logo após a explosão aparecem vários atores maquiados com sangue falso e roupas sujas.
Tudo para que as mídias FAKE NEWS pudessem filmar e vender a notícia falsa ao resto do mundo para nos sensibilizar a abrir as portas do nosso país para eles.

Ex presidente pró islã solta prisioneiros que voltaram a combater o Mundo Livre

07/03/2017

122 vicious prisoners, released by the Obama Administration from Gitmo, have returned to the battlefield. Just another terrible decision!

LEIA A ÍNTEGRA DO DECRETO ANTI TERRORISMO – Nosso líder máximo combate abertamente o terror islâmico – Executive Order Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States

06/03/2017

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

March 06, 2017

Executive Order Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States

EXECUTIVE ORDER

– – – – – – –

PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES

 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and to protect the Nation from terrorist activities by foreign nationals admitted to the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:

 

Section 1.  Policy and Purpose.  (a)  It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks, including those committed by foreign nationals.  The screening and vetting protocols and procedures associated with the visa-issuance process and the United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) play a crucial role in detecting foreign nationals who may commit, aid, or support acts of terrorism and in preventing those individuals from entering the United States.  It is therefore the policy of the United States to improve the screening and vetting protocols and procedures associated with the visa-issuance process and the USRAP.

 

(b)  On January 27, 2017, to implement this policy, I issued Executive Order 13769 (Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States).

 

(i)    Among other actions, Executive Order 13769 suspended for 90 days the entry of certain aliens from seven countries:  Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.  These are countries that had already been identified as presenting heightened concerns about terrorism and travel to the United States.  Specifically, the suspension applied to countries referred to in, or designated under, section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), in which Congress restricted use of the Visa Waiver Program for nationals of, and aliens recently present in, (A) Iraq or Syria, (B) any country designated by the Secretary of State as a state sponsor of terrorism (currently Iran, Syria, and Sudan), and (C) any other country designated as a country of concern by the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence.  In 2016, the Secretary of Homeland Security designated Libya, Somalia, and Yemen as additional countries of concern for travel purposes, based on consideration of three statutory factors related to terrorism and national security:  “(I) whether the presence of an alien in the country or area increases the likelihood that the alien is a credible threat to the national security of the United States; (II) whether a foreign terrorist organization has a significant presence in the country or area; and (III) whether the country or area is a safe haven for terrorists.”  8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12)(D)(ii).  Additionally, Members of Congress have expressed concerns about screening and vetting procedures following recent terrorist attacks in this country and in Europe.

 

(ii)   In ordering the temporary suspension of entry described in subsection (b)(i) of this section, I exercised my authority under Article II of the Constitution and under section 212(f) of the INA, which provides in relevant part:  “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”  8 U.S.C. 1182(f).  Under these authorities, I determined that, for a brief period of 90 days, while existing screening and vetting procedures were under review, the entry into the United States of certain aliens from the seven identified countries — each afflicted by terrorism in a manner that compromised the ability of the United States to rely on normal decision-making procedures about travel to the United States — would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  Nonetheless, I permitted the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security to grant case-by-case waivers when they determined that it was in the national interest to do so.

 

(iii)  Executive Order 13769 also suspended the USRAP for 120 days.  Terrorist groups have sought to infiltrate several nations through refugee programs.  Accordingly, I temporarily suspended the USRAP pending a review of our procedures for screening and vetting refugees.  Nonetheless, I permitted the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security to jointly grant case-by-case waivers when they determined that it was in the national interest to do so.

 

(iv)   Executive Order 13769 did not provide a basis for discriminating for or against members of any particular religion.  While that order allowed for prioritization of refugee claims from members of persecuted religious minority groups, that priority applied to refugees from every nation, including those in which Islam is a minority religion, and it applied to minority sects within a religion.  That order was not motivated by animus toward any religion, but was instead intended to protect the ability of religious minorities — whoever they are and wherever they reside — to avail themselves of the USRAP in light of their particular challenges and circumstances.

 

(c)  The implementation of Executive Order 13769 has been delayed by litigation.  Most significantly, enforcement of critical provisions of that order has been temporarily halted by court orders that apply nationwide and extend even to foreign nationals with no prior or substantial connection to the United States.  On February 9, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declined to stay or narrow one such order pending the outcome of further judicial proceedings, while noting that the “political branches are far better equipped to make appropriate distinctions” about who should be covered by a suspension of entry or of refugee admissions.

 

(d)  Nationals from the countries previously identified under section 217(a)(12) of the INA warrant additional scrutiny in connection with our immigration policies because the conditions in these countries present heightened threats.  Each of these countries is a state sponsor of terrorism, has been significantly compromised by terrorist organizations, or contains active conflict zones.  Any of these circumstances diminishes the foreign government’s willingness or ability to share or validate important information about individuals seeking to travel to the United States.  Moreover, the significant presence in each of these countries of terrorist organizations, their members, and others exposed to those organizations increases the chance that conditions will be exploited to enable terrorist operatives or sympathizers to travel to the United States.  Finally, once foreign nationals from these countries are admitted to the United States, it is often difficult to remove them, because many of these countries typically delay issuing, or refuse to issue, travel documents.

 

(e)  The following are brief descriptions, taken in part from the Department of State’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 (June 2016), of some of the conditions in six of the previously designated countries that demonstrate why their nationals continue to present heightened risks to the security of the United States:

 

(i)    Iran.  Iran has been designated as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1984 and continues to support various terrorist groups, including Hizballah, Hamas, and terrorist groups in Iraq.  Iran has also been linked to support for al-Qa’ida and has permitted al-Qa’ida to transport funds and fighters through Iran to Syria and South Asia.  Iran does not cooperate with the United States in counterterrorism efforts.

 

(ii)   Libya.  Libya is an active combat zone, with hostilities between the internationally recognized government and its rivals.  In many parts of the country, security and law enforcement functions are provided by armed militias rather than state institutions.  Violent extremist groups, including the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), have exploited these conditions to expand their presence in the country.  The Libyan government provides some cooperation with the United States’ counterterrorism efforts, but it is unable to secure thousands of miles of its land and maritime borders, enabling the illicit flow of weapons, migrants, and foreign terrorist fighters.  The United States Embassy in Libya suspended its operations in 2014.

 

(iii)  Somalia.  Portions of Somalia have been terrorist safe havens.  Al-Shabaab, an al-Qa’ida-affiliated terrorist group, has operated in the country for years and continues to plan and mount operations within Somalia and in neighboring countries.  Somalia has porous borders, and most countries do not recognize Somali identity documents.  The Somali government cooperates with the United States in some counterterrorism operations but does not have the capacity to sustain military pressure on or to investigate suspected terrorists.

 

(iv)   Sudan.  Sudan has been designated as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1993 because of its support for international terrorist groups, including Hizballah and Hamas.  Historically, Sudan provided safe havens for al-Qa’ida and other terrorist groups to meet and train.  Although Sudan’s support to al-Qa’ida has ceased and it provides some cooperation with the United States’ counterterrorism efforts, elements of core al-Qa’ida and ISIS-linked terrorist groups remain active in the country.

 

(v)    Syria.  Syria has been designated as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1979.  The Syrian government is engaged in an ongoing military conflict against ISIS and others for control of portions of the country.  At the same time, Syria continues to support other terrorist groups.  It has allowed or encouraged extremists to pass through its territory to enter Iraq.  ISIS continues to attract foreign fighters to Syria and to use its base in Syria to plot or encourage attacks around the globe, including in the United States.  The United States Embassy in Syria suspended its operations in 2012.  Syria does not cooperate with the United States’ counterterrorism efforts.

 

(vi)   Yemen.  Yemen is the site of an ongoing conflict between the incumbent government and the Houthi-led opposition.  Both ISIS and a second group, al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), have exploited this conflict to expand their presence in Yemen and to carry out hundreds of attacks.  Weapons and other materials smuggled across Yemen’s porous borders are used to finance AQAP and other terrorist activities.  In 2015, the United States Embassy in Yemen suspended its operations, and embassy staff were relocated out of the country.  Yemen has been supportive of, but has not been able to cooperate fully with, the United States in counterterrorism efforts.

 

(f)  In light of the conditions in these six countries, until the assessment of current screening and vetting procedures required by section 2 of this order is completed, the risk of erroneously permitting entry of a national of one of these countries who intends to commit terrorist acts or otherwise harm the national security of the United States is unacceptably high.  Accordingly, while that assessment is ongoing, I am imposing a temporary pause on the entry of nationals from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, subject to categorical exceptions and case-by-case waivers, as described in section 3 of this order.

 

(g)  Iraq presents a special case.  Portions of Iraq remain active combat zones.  Since 2014, ISIS has had dominant influence over significant territory in northern and central Iraq.  Although that influence has been significantly reduced due to the efforts and sacrifices of the Iraqi government and armed forces, working along with a United States-led coalition, the ongoing conflict has impacted the Iraqi government’s capacity to secure its borders and to identify fraudulent travel documents.  Nevertheless, the close cooperative relationship between the United States and the democratically elected Iraqi government, the strong United States diplomatic presence in Iraq, the significant presence of United States forces in Iraq, and Iraq’s commitment to combat ISIS justify different treatment for Iraq.  In particular, those Iraqi government forces that have fought to regain more than half of the territory previously dominated by ISIS have shown steadfast determination and earned enduring respect as they battle an armed group that is the common enemy of Iraq and the United States.  In addition, since Executive Order 13769 was issued, the Iraqi government has expressly undertaken steps to enhance travel documentation, information sharing, and the return of Iraqi nationals subject to final orders of removal.  Decisions about issuance of visas or granting admission to Iraqi nationals should be subjected to additional scrutiny to determine if applicants have connections with ISIS or other terrorist organizations, or otherwise pose a risk to either national security or public safety.

 

(h)  Recent history shows that some of those who have entered the United States through our immigration system have proved to be threats to our national security.  Since 2001, hundreds of persons born abroad have been convicted of terrorism-related crimes in the United States.  They have included not just persons who came here legally on visas but also individuals who first entered the country as refugees.  For example, in January 2013, two Iraqi nationals admitted to the United States as refugees in 2009 were sentenced to 40 years and to life in prison, respectively, for multiple terrorism-related offenses.  And in October 2014, a native of Somalia who had been brought to the United States as a child refugee and later became a naturalized United States citizen was sentenced to 30 years in prison for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction as part of a plot to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas-tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon.  The Attorney General has reported to me that more than 300 persons who entered the United States as refugees are currently the subjects of counterterrorism investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

 

(i)  Given the foregoing, the entry into the United States of foreign nationals who may commit, aid, or support acts of terrorism remains a matter of grave concern.  In light of the Ninth Circuit’s observation that the political branches are better suited to determine the appropriate scope of any suspensions than are the courts, and in order to avoid spending additional time pursuing litigation, I am revoking Executive Order 13769 and replacing it with this order, which expressly excludes from the suspensions categories of aliens that have prompted judicial concerns and which clarifies or refines the approach to certain other issues or categories of affected aliens.

 

Sec. 2.  Temporary Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern During Review Period.  (a)  The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall conduct a worldwide review to identify whether, and if so what, additional information will be needed from each foreign country to adjudicate an application by a national of that country for a visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual is not a security or public-safety threat.  The Secretary of Homeland Security may conclude that certain information is needed from particular countries even if it is not needed from every country.

 

(b)  The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President a report on the results of the worldwide review described in subsection (a) of this section, including the Secretary of Homeland Security’s determination of the information needed from each country for adjudications and a list of countries that do not provide adequate information, within 20 days of the effective date of this order.  The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence.

 

(c)  To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening and vetting of foreign nationals, to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists, and in light of the national security concerns referenced in section 1 of this order, I hereby proclaim, pursuant to sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), that the unrestricted entry into the United States of nationals of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  I therefore direct that the entry into the United States of nationals of those six countries be suspended for 90 days from the effective date of this order, subject to the limitations, waivers, and exceptions set forth in sections 3 and 12 of this order.

 

(d)  Upon submission of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed from each country for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request that all foreign governments that do not supply such information regarding their nationals begin providing it within 50 days of notification.

 

(e)  After the period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion in a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of appropriate categories of foreign nationals of countries that have not provided the information requested until they do so or until the Secretary of Homeland Security certifies that the country has an adequate plan to do so, or has adequately shared information through other means.  The Secretary of State, the Attorney General, or the Secretary of Homeland Security may also submit to the President the names of additional countries for which any of them recommends other lawful restrictions or limitations deemed necessary for the security or welfare of the United States.

 

(f)  At any point after the submission of the list described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, may submit to the President the names of any additional countries recommended for similar treatment, as well as the names of any countries that they recommend should be removed from the scope of a proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section.

 

(g)  The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the President a joint report on the progress in implementing this order within 60 days of the effective date of this order, a second report within 90 days of the effective date of this order, a third report within 120 days of the effective date of this order, and a fourth report within 150 days of the effective date of this order.

 

Sec. 3.  Scope and Implementation of Suspension.

 

(a)  Scope.  Subject to the exceptions set forth in subsection (b) of this section and any waiver under subsection (c) of this section, the suspension of entry pursuant to section 2 of this order shall apply only to foreign nationals of the designated countries who:

 

(i)    are outside the United States on the effective date of this order;

 

(ii)   did not have a valid visa at 5:00 p.m., eastern standard time on January 27, 2017; and

 

(iii)  do not have a valid visa on the effective date of this order.

 

(b)  Exceptions.  The suspension of entry pursuant to section 2 of this order shall not apply to:

 

(i)    any lawful permanent resident of the United States;

 

(ii)   any foreign national who is admitted to or paroled into the United States on or after the effective date of this order;

 

(iii)  any foreign national who has a document other than a visa, valid on the effective date of this order or issued on any date thereafter, that permits him or her to travel to the United States and seek entry or admission, such as an advance parole document;

 

(iv)   any dual national of a country designated under section 2 of this order when the individual is traveling on a passport issued by a non-designated country;

 

(v)    any foreign national traveling on a diplomatic or diplomatic-type visa, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visa, C-2 visa for travel to the United Nations, or G-1, G-2, G-3, or G-4 visa; or

 

(vi)   any foreign national who has been granted asylum; any refugee who has already been admitted to the United States; or any individual who has been granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.

 

(c)  Waivers.  Notwithstanding the suspension of entry pursuant to section 2 of this order, a consular officer, or, as appropriate, the Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), or the Commissioner’s delegee, may, in the consular officer’s or the CBP official’s discretion, decide on a case-by-case basis to authorize the issuance of a visa to, or to permit the entry of, a foreign national for whom entry is otherwise suspended if the foreign national has demonstrated to the officer’s satisfaction that denying entry during the suspension period would cause undue hardship, and that his or her entry would not pose a threat to national security and would be in the national interest.  Unless otherwise specified by the Secretary of Homeland Security, any waiver issued by a consular officer as part of the visa issuance process will be effective both for the issuance of a visa and any subsequent entry on that visa, but will leave all other requirements for admission or entry unchanged.  Case-by-case waivers could be appropriate in circumstances such as the following:

 

(i)     the foreign national has previously been admitted to the United States for a continuous period of work, study, or other long-term activity, is outside the United States on the effective date of this order, seeks to reenter the United States to resume that activity, and the denial of reentry during the suspension period would impair that activity;

 

(ii)    the foreign national has previously established significant contacts with the United States but is outside the United States on the effective date of this order for work, study, or other lawful activity;

 

(iii)   the foreign national seeks to enter the United States for significant business or professional obligations and the denial of entry during the suspension period would impair those obligations;

 

(iv)    the foreign national seeks to enter the United States to visit or reside with a close family member (e.g., a spouse, child, or parent) who is a United States citizen, lawful permanent resident, or alien lawfully admitted on a valid nonimmigrant visa, and the denial of entry during the suspension period would cause undue hardship;

 

(v)     the foreign national is an infant, a young child or adoptee, an individual needing urgent medical care, or someone whose entry is otherwise justified by the special circumstances of the case;

 

(vi)    the foreign national has been employed by, or on behalf of, the United States Government (or is an eligible dependent of such an employee) and the employee can document that he or she has provided faithful and valuable service to the United States Government;

 

(vii)   the foreign national is traveling for purposes related to an international organization designated under the International Organizations Immunities Act (IOIA), 22 U.S.C. 288 et seq., traveling for purposes of conducting meetings or business with the United States Government, or traveling to conduct business on behalf of an international organization not designated under the IOIA;

 

(viii)  the foreign national is a landed Canadian immigrant who applies for a visa at a location within Canada; or

 

(ix)    the foreign national is traveling as a United States Government-sponsored exchange visitor.

 

Sec. 4.  Additional Inquiries Related to Nationals of Iraq.  An application by any Iraqi national for a visa, admission, or other immigration benefit should be subjected to thorough review, including, as appropriate, consultation with a designee of the Secretary of Defense and use of the additional information that has been obtained in the context of the close U.S.-Iraqi security partnership, since Executive Order 13769 was issued, concerning individuals suspected of ties to ISIS or other terrorist organizations and individuals coming from territories controlled or formerly controlled by ISIS.  Such review shall include consideration of whether the applicant has connections with ISIS or other terrorist organizations or with territory that is or has been under the dominant influence of ISIS, as well as any other information bearing on whether the applicant may be a threat to commit acts of terrorism or otherwise threaten the national security or public safety of the United States.

 

Sec. 5.  Implementing Uniform Screening and Vetting Standards for All Immigration Programs.  (a)  The Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence shall implement a program, as part of the process for adjudications, to identify individuals who seek to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis, who support terrorism, violent extremism, acts of violence toward any group or class of people within the United States, or who present a risk of causing harm subsequent to their entry.  This program shall include the development of a uniform baseline for screening and vetting standards and procedures, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that applicants are who they claim to be; a mechanism to assess whether applicants may commit, aid, or support any kind of violent, criminal, or terrorist acts after entering the United States; and any other appropriate means for ensuring the proper collection of all information necessary for a rigorous evaluation of all grounds of inadmissibility or grounds for the denial of other immigration benefits.

 

(b)  The Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of the program described in subsection (a) of this section within 60 days of the effective date of this order, a second report within 100 days of the effective date of this order, and a third report within 200 days of the effective date of this order.

 

Sec. 6.  Realignment of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for Fiscal Year 2017.  (a)  The Secretary of State shall suspend travel of refugees into the United States under the USRAP, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall suspend decisions on applications for refugee status, for 120 days after the effective date of this order, subject to waivers pursuant to subsection (c) of this section.  During the 120-day period, the Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, shall review the USRAP application and adjudication processes to determine what additional procedures should be used to ensure that individuals seeking admission as refugees do not pose a threat to the security and welfare of the United States, and shall implement such additional procedures.  The suspension described in this subsection shall not apply to refugee applicants who, before the effective date of this order, have been formally scheduled for transit by the Department of State.  The Secretary of State shall resume travel of refugees into the United States under the USRAP 120 days after the effective date of this order, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall resume making decisions on applications for refugee status only for stateless persons and nationals of countries for which the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence have jointly determined that the additional procedures implemented pursuant to this subsection are adequate to ensure the security and welfare of the United States.

 

(b)  Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, I hereby proclaim that the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017 would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and thus suspend any entries in excess of that number until such time as I determine that additional entries would be in the national interest.

 

(c)  Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the entry of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest and does not pose a threat to the security or welfare of the United States, including in circumstances such as the following:  the individual’s entry would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement or arrangement, or the denial of entry would cause undue hardship.

 

(d)  It is the policy of the executive branch that, to the extent permitted by law and as practicable, State and local jurisdictions be granted a role in the process of determining the placement or settlement in their jurisdictions of aliens eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees.  To that end, the Secretary of State shall examine existing law to determine the extent to which, consistent with applicable law, State and local jurisdictions may have greater involvement in the process of determining the placement or resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions, and shall devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement.

 

Sec. 7.  Rescission of Exercise of Authority Relating to the Terrorism Grounds of Inadmissibility.  The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, consider rescinding the exercises of authority permitted by section 212(d)(3)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(3)(B), relating to the terrorism grounds of inadmissibility, as well as any related implementing directives or guidance.

 

Sec. 8.  Expedited Completion of the Biometric Entry-Exit Tracking System.  (a)  The Secretary of Homeland Security shall expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry‑exit tracking system for in-scope travelers to the United States, as recommended by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

 

(b)  The Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the President periodic reports on the progress of the directive set forth in subsection (a) of this section.  The initial report shall be submitted within 100 days of the effective date of this order, a second report shall be submitted within 200 days of the effective date of this order, and a third report shall be submitted within 365 days of the effective date of this order.  The Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit further reports every 180 days thereafter until the system is fully deployed and operational.

 

Sec. 9.  Visa Interview Security.  (a)  The Secretary of State shall immediately suspend the Visa Interview Waiver Program and ensure compliance with section 222 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1202, which requires that all individuals seeking a nonimmigrant visa undergo an in-person interview, subject to specific statutory exceptions.  This suspension shall not apply to any foreign national traveling on a diplomatic or diplomatic-type visa, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visa, C-2 visa for travel to the United Nations, or G-1, G-2, G-3, or G-4 visa; traveling for purposes related to an international organization designated under the IOIA; or traveling for purposes of conducting meetings or business with the United States Government.

 

(b)  To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of State shall immediately expand the Consular Fellows Program, including by substantially increasing the number of Fellows, lengthening or making permanent the period of service, and making language training at the Foreign Service Institute available to Fellows for assignment to posts outside of their area of core linguistic ability, to ensure that nonimmigrant visa-interview wait times are not unduly affected.

 

Sec. 10.  Visa Validity Reciprocity.  The Secretary of State shall review all nonimmigrant visa reciprocity agreements and arrangements to ensure that they are, with respect to each visa classification, truly reciprocal insofar as practicable with respect to validity period and fees, as required by sections 221(c) and 281 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1201(c) and 1351, and other treatment.  If another country does not treat United States nationals seeking nonimmigrant visas in a truly reciprocal manner, the Secretary of State shall adjust the visa validity period, fee schedule, or other treatment to match the treatment of United States nationals by that foreign country, to the extent practicable.

 

Sec. 11.  Transparency and Data Collection.  (a)  To be more transparent with the American people and to implement more effectively policies and practices that serve the national interest, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall, consistent with applicable law and national security, collect and make publicly available the following information:

 

(i)    information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation with or provision of material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national-security-related reasons;

 

(ii)   information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and who have engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States;

 

(iii)  information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including so-called “honor killings,” in the United States by foreign nationals; and

 

(iv)   any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses.

 

(b)  The Secretary of Homeland Security shall release the initial report under subsection (a) of this section within 180 days of the effective date of this order and shall include information for the period from September 11, 2001, until the date of the initial report.  Subsequent reports shall be issued every 180 days thereafter and reflect the period since the previous report.

 

Sec. 12.  Enforcement.  (a)  The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with appropriate domestic and international partners, including countries and organizations, to ensure efficient, effective, and appropriate implementation of the actions directed in this order.

 

(b)  In implementing this order, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including, as appropriate, those providing an opportunity for individuals to claim a fear of persecution or torture, such as the credible fear determination for aliens covered by section 235(b)(1)(A) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(A).

 

(c)  No immigrant or nonimmigrant visa issued before the effective date of this order shall be revoked pursuant to this order.

 

(d)  Any individual whose visa was marked revoked or marked canceled as a result of Executive Order 13769 shall be entitled to a travel document confirming that the individual is permitted to travel to the United States and seek entry.  Any prior cancellation or revocation of a visa that was solely pursuant to Executive Order 13769 shall not be the basis of inadmissibility for any future determination about entry or admissibility.

 

(e)  This order shall not apply to an individual who has been granted asylum, to a refugee who has already been admitted to the United States, or to an individual granted withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture.  Nothing in this order shall be construed to limit the ability of an individual to seek asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture, consistent with the laws of the United States.

 

Sec. 13.  Revocation.  Executive Order 13769 of January 27, 2017, is revoked as of the effective date of this order.

 

Sec. 14.  Effective Date.  This order is effective at 12:01 a.m., eastern daylight time on March 16, 2017.

 

Sec. 15.  Severability.  (a)  If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its other provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

 

(b)  If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid because of the lack of certain procedural requirements, the relevant executive branch officials shall implement those procedural requirements.

 

Sec. 16.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

 

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

 

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

 

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

 

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

 

DONALD J. TRUMP

 

THE WHITE HOUSE,

March 6, 2017.

Brasil abrirá as portas para o Terrorismo?

05/03/2017

SERÁ QUE O BRASIL ESTA PREPARADO PARA RECEBER
GRUPO DE FANÁTICOS DETONANDO O PATRIMÔNIO PÚBLICO.

Lire
-9:12

Paramètres visuels supplémentaires

Passer en Mode Regarder et DéfilerAfficher en plein écran

Remettre le son

84 902 vues

Aos gritos de “Allahu Akbar” (Deus é grande) os muçulmanos dão sua contribuição, e ajudam a destruir a cidade de Paris, na Europa. Será que estamos preparados para lidarmos com estes terroristas

País Rico acolher falsos refugiados é uma coisa – País Pobre já tem seus próprios problemas

05/03/2017

17022111_1304511712967430_7606740186993064837_n

O antipapa disse mesmo que NÃO há terrorismo árabe?

28/02/2017

Do Júlio Severo

Se o Papa Francisco tivesse mandado um cardeal premiar a Arábia Saudita por combater o terrorismo, eu entenderia. Esse papa é às vezes muito maluquinho.

Afinal, não é ele que diz que não existe terrorismo islâmico e que o islamismo é paz?

Mas o Trump enviar o diretor da CIA para premiar a Arábia Saudita por combater o terrorismo não faz sentido algum.

Teria feito sentido se ele tivesse enviado o diretor da CIA para premiar a Rússia, que de fato está combatendo o terrorismo.

Querendo ou não, Trump acabou agindo igual ao papa maluquinho…