When it comes to terror, isn’t it time we started listening seriously to Trump? How many more?
That’s all I could think this morning as news broke of yet another ISIS terror attack, this time in Brussels.
How many more innocent men, women and children are going to be blown to pieces by these murderous bastards?
How many more airports, train stations, sports stadiums, restaurants or concert halls will be obliterated in a hail of suicide bombs and bullets?
How many more world leaders will wring their hands on national television afterwards and spout pointless platitudes about the ‘poor brave victims’ and ‘heroic emergency services’?
How many taunting, gleeful claims of responsibility will the despicable perpetrators of these evil crimes be able to issue?
I’m sick of this, aren’t you?
Sick of feeling sick about such endless, senseless barbarism.
And the worst thing about it is that I see no end.
The inherent problem which causes it, chaotic war-torn instability in the Middle East, is getting worse, not better; just as the financial and military resource of the enemy is growing greater, not reducing.
Yet just as the world is crying out for strong decisive leadership, there is none.
America has a demob happy President Obama eeking out his last few months in office. A man whose infamous ‘leading from behind’ philosophy to foreign policy has been partly responsible for the war in Syria raging uncontrollably for five years – allowing fundamentalism to ferment.
Obama has zero interest in doing anything tangible to really deal with ISIS. This is now parked in the tray marked ‘next president’s problem.’
Europe, meanwhile, is splintering at the seams, ravaged by an unprecedented migration crisis that nobody seems to have a clue how to handle.
France, reeling from two horrendous attacks in Paris, is understandably highly fearful of yet more terror coming its way.
Belgium officials effectively conceded today that they have no real way to protect themselves against the ISIS threat. A fact surely born out by the fact that today’s onslaught in Brussels happened right when the city most expected it, following the capture of Paris attacks suspect Saleh Abdeslam three days ago.
Britain, surely a target anytime soon, is on red alert but its warring politicians are too distracted by the upcoming EU referendum in June to pay anything more than lame lip service to terrorism.
So nobody seems to be doing anything concrete to stop ISIS, or even suggesting a new way to do so given the spectacular lack of success to date.
Well almost nobody.
By coincidence, I had an interview scheduled today with the world’s most controversial man, Donald Trump, for my UK show, Good Morning Britain.
It was set up a couple of weeks ago, but the timing was eerily prescient.
Here is one man who definitely has a plan to deal with ISIS terrorism. Several plans in fact.
The problem is that people don’t like them. Well, a lot of people don’t anyway.
Trump, current front-runner for the Republican nomination, wants to hit ISIS ‘so hard they never recover’.
(As he told me: ‘You've got to take them out and you've got to take them out harshly and you've got to take them out fast.’)
He also wants a short-term ban on Muslims entering the U.S. until, as he puts it, ‘we figure out what the hell is going on?’
And he wants to torture suspects like Abdeslam with techniques like water-boarding to try and extract information about future attacks.
Oh, and he wants to build a giant wall to stop illegal immigrants pouring over the Mexican border into America.
George Clooney hit out at Trump yesterday, as he endorsed Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton for the presidency, saying: ‘If you listen to the loudest voices out there today, you'd think we're a country that hates Mexicans, hates Muslims, and thinks that committing war crimes is the best way to make America great again.’
I spoke to Trump for 40 minutes. He was, as you’d expect, bombastic, defiant and self-congratulatory. Why wouldn’t he be? He’s ripped up every political rulebook to take this presidential race by storm, a scenario that is hardly going to deflate the ego of New York’s most cock-sure billionaire tycoon.
But he also spoke in more detail about his plans to combat ISIS and I found myself nodding more than I expected.
Trump told me countries must tighten their borders in light of these terror attacks, especially to anyone related to an ISIS fighter in Syria.
Is he so wrong?
He told me he wants law-abiding Muslims to root out the extremists in their midst, expressing his bafflement and anger that someone like Abdeslam was able to hide for so long in the very part of Brussels he had previously lived.
Is he so wrong?
He told me America must make it far harder for illegal immigrants to enter the U.S. and thinks European countries should follow suit.
Is he so wrong?
He told me he believes there are now areas of many major European cities which have become poisonous breeding grounds for radicalized Islamic terror.
Is he so wrong?
I didn’t feel I was talking to a lunatic, as many seem to view Trump.
I saw a guy, a non-politician unfettered by PC language restraints, who is genuinely furious at the devastation which ISIS is wreaking, and seriously concerned for the security of his fellow Americans and indeed, the citizens of Europe.
Salah Abdeslam, 26, was captured in Belgium just days ago for his part in the Paris attacks
+7
Salah Abdeslam, 26, was captured in Belgium just days ago for his part in the Paris attacks
(Remember, Trump’s from New York and felt the horror of 9/11 very personally and very deeply like all New Yorkers.)
His plans for tackling this extraordinarily dangerous threat to the world have been widely condemned as ‘bigoted’ and ‘racist’.
But although I publicly criticised him for the Muslim short-term ban suggestion, I’ve known Trump for ten years and I don’t believe he’s a racist.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz43m5m4wH2
Wow, Morgan and I finally agree on something.
Mark
That’s all I could think this morning as news broke of yet another ISIS terror attack, this time in Brussels.
How many more innocent men, women and children are going to be blown to pieces by these murderous bastards?
How many more airports, train stations, sports stadiums, restaurants or concert halls will be obliterated in a hail of suicide bombs and bullets?
How many more world leaders will wring their hands on national television afterwards and spout pointless platitudes about the ‘poor brave victims’ and ‘heroic emergency services’?
How many taunting, gleeful claims of responsibility will the despicable perpetrators of these evil crimes be able to issue?
I’m sick of this, aren’t you?
Sick of feeling sick about such endless, senseless barbarism.
And the worst thing about it is that I see no end.
The inherent problem which causes it, chaotic war-torn instability in the Middle East, is getting worse, not better; just as the financial and military resource of the enemy is growing greater, not reducing.
Yet just as the world is crying out for strong decisive leadership, there is none.
America has a demob happy President Obama eeking out his last few months in office. A man whose infamous ‘leading from behind’ philosophy to foreign policy has been partly responsible for the war in Syria raging uncontrollably for five years – allowing fundamentalism to ferment.
Obama has zero interest in doing anything tangible to really deal with ISIS. This is now parked in the tray marked ‘next president’s problem.’
Europe, meanwhile, is splintering at the seams, ravaged by an unprecedented migration crisis that nobody seems to have a clue how to handle.
France, reeling from two horrendous attacks in Paris, is understandably highly fearful of yet more terror coming its way.
Belgium officials effectively conceded today that they have no real way to protect themselves against the ISIS threat. A fact surely born out by the fact that today’s onslaught in Brussels happened right when the city most expected it, following the capture of Paris attacks suspect Saleh Abdeslam three days ago.
Britain, surely a target anytime soon, is on red alert but its warring politicians are too distracted by the upcoming EU referendum in June to pay anything more than lame lip service to terrorism.
So nobody seems to be doing anything concrete to stop ISIS, or even suggesting a new way to do so given the spectacular lack of success to date.
Well almost nobody.
By coincidence, I had an interview scheduled today with the world’s most controversial man, Donald Trump, for my UK show, Good Morning Britain.
It was set up a couple of weeks ago, but the timing was eerily prescient.
Here is one man who definitely has a plan to deal with ISIS terrorism. Several plans in fact.
The problem is that people don’t like them. Well, a lot of people don’t anyway.
Trump, current front-runner for the Republican nomination, wants to hit ISIS ‘so hard they never recover’.
(As he told me: ‘You've got to take them out and you've got to take them out harshly and you've got to take them out fast.’)
He also wants a short-term ban on Muslims entering the U.S. until, as he puts it, ‘we figure out what the hell is going on?’
And he wants to torture suspects like Abdeslam with techniques like water-boarding to try and extract information about future attacks.
Oh, and he wants to build a giant wall to stop illegal immigrants pouring over the Mexican border into America.
George Clooney hit out at Trump yesterday, as he endorsed Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton for the presidency, saying: ‘If you listen to the loudest voices out there today, you'd think we're a country that hates Mexicans, hates Muslims, and thinks that committing war crimes is the best way to make America great again.’
I spoke to Trump for 40 minutes. He was, as you’d expect, bombastic, defiant and self-congratulatory. Why wouldn’t he be? He’s ripped up every political rulebook to take this presidential race by storm, a scenario that is hardly going to deflate the ego of New York’s most cock-sure billionaire tycoon.
But he also spoke in more detail about his plans to combat ISIS and I found myself nodding more than I expected.
Trump told me countries must tighten their borders in light of these terror attacks, especially to anyone related to an ISIS fighter in Syria.
Is he so wrong?
He told me he wants law-abiding Muslims to root out the extremists in their midst, expressing his bafflement and anger that someone like Abdeslam was able to hide for so long in the very part of Brussels he had previously lived.
Is he so wrong?
He told me America must make it far harder for illegal immigrants to enter the U.S. and thinks European countries should follow suit.
Is he so wrong?
He told me he believes there are now areas of many major European cities which have become poisonous breeding grounds for radicalized Islamic terror.
Is he so wrong?
I didn’t feel I was talking to a lunatic, as many seem to view Trump.
I saw a guy, a non-politician unfettered by PC language restraints, who is genuinely furious at the devastation which ISIS is wreaking, and seriously concerned for the security of his fellow Americans and indeed, the citizens of Europe.
Salah Abdeslam, 26, was captured in Belgium just days ago for his part in the Paris attacks
+7
Salah Abdeslam, 26, was captured in Belgium just days ago for his part in the Paris attacks
(Remember, Trump’s from New York and felt the horror of 9/11 very personally and very deeply like all New Yorkers.)
His plans for tackling this extraordinarily dangerous threat to the world have been widely condemned as ‘bigoted’ and ‘racist’.
But although I publicly criticised him for the Muslim short-term ban suggestion, I’ve known Trump for ten years and I don’t believe he’s a racist.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz43m5m4wH2
Wow, Morgan and I finally agree on something.
Mark
Comment