Trump bars door to refugees, visitors from seven nations

[JetsetBkk]

10 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Terrorists acting in the USA didn't come from trump's Muslim ban list. They came from other nations like Saudi and a big trend is HOME GROWN terrorists.

 

It is not a Muslim ban and you know it.

 

And the list is not Trump's (with a capital T):

 

"The Department of Homeland Security today announced that it is continuing its implementation of the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 with the addition of Libya, Somalia, and Yemen as three countries of concern, limiting Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals who have traveled to these countries. "

 

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs-announces-further-travel-restrictions-visa-waiver-program

 

 

Extract from the Executive order - no word about religion:

 

"I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas)."

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/text-of-trump-executive-order-nation-ban-refugees/

 

 

Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country in the world. It is not on the (Obama Administration's) list.

Pakistan is the next ............... ditto.

India is the next .....................ditto.

 

 

But keep on with the fake news if it makes you feel better.

 

 

[lungmi]

15 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

You need to read up better on your understanding of U.S. history.

 

U.S. history is replete with immigration restrictions and popular anti-immigrant movements against people of various countries at various points in time for all kinds of different reasons. Almost everyone has been on the losing end of those immigration restrictions at some point in U.S. history, including Chinese, Irish, Italians, Germans, Japanese, and on and on. Not saying that's good, just saying, that's the real history of things, contrary to your belief.

Trump style changing the facts: The ball of demolition used by Trump to destroy the American History

of Basic human rights was my  point. And you see (if you are not blind), the majority of Americans

no more follow Trump

[Jingthing]

Yes trump is losing support. He came in with minority support and that will continue to degrade. But he'll always have his core. His DEPLORABLE core.  For now, he's got the POWER as well. There are legal ways to challenge that, but that doesn't mean they will succeed. 

Edited January 31, 2017 by Jingthing

[SaintLouisBlues]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Yes trump is losing support. He came in with minority support and that will continue to degrade. But he'll always have his core. His DEPLORABLE core.  For now, he's got the POWER as well. There are legal ways to challenge that, but that doesn't mean they will succeed. 

Go on, it must be time to upgrade from stamping your foot to throwing a hissy fit

[F4UCorsair]

4 hours ago, Thakkar said:

I lsctually think that's not a bad idea. But it should be applied to non Muslims as well: Hindus have to volunteer at Christian and Muslim charities; Christians at Jewish and Muslim charities, atheists at Mormon and Scientology charities (we atheists deserve the looniest gigs!)

 

but, seriously, I wholeheartedly agree. America is a melting pot and that should be the guiding principle.

Other faiths have not demonstrated a propensity for violence against those holding  a different belief.

No sir, that's the domain of Islam.

[SaintLouisBlues]

1 minute ago, F4UCorsair said:

Other faiths have not demonstrated a propensity for violence against those holding  a different belief. No sir, that's the domain of Islam.

There was I thinking ... the Thirty Years' War ... the Troubles in Northern Ireland ... the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre ... Buddhist persecution of the Rohingyas in Myanmar ... Hindu attacks on Moslems during the Partition and then later in India (the basis of the BJP political party). Shall I go on? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_persecution

[Andaman Al]

This is the view of good Americans who know where they are from and who they owe it to.

 

 

 

[Thakkar]

1 hour ago, hugh2121 said:

I certainly would not trust anybody who follows the teachings of a paedophile.

But are you ok with a guy who boasts about grabbing pussies and kissing women without their permission? Who talks of walking into Miss Teen USA dressing rooms to perve on semi-naked teens?

[Thakkar]

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The trick in the entire immigration debate (at least for those who are not racist on the subject) is to try to distinguish the first kind of Muslims (who I think most Americans would be OK to accept) vs. the second kind of Muslims, who are the kind who end up making the front pages of the newspapers when they finally get so crazed that they start shooting, stabbing and otherwise harming the innocent folks around them.

There's the clincher. I agree with what you're saying in the entire post. It's important to differentiate between people like you and many other critics of non-assimilative immigration.

The thing is, if you scratch below the surface of many ant-immigration talk, here on TVF, on Fox or Breitbart or some talk radio or even the comments sections of the Guardian—it looks a lot like cover for racism and religious bigotry. The same with talk about banning full head coverings (which I happen to agree with) "to protect women from oppression" or brouhaha about halal meat "to protect animal rights".

 

My argument is with the people who talk about one thing while they're really whacking off to something else.

[F4UCorsair]

11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

The final electoral results were 307 to 227.

Notita huge margin. Stop the deception. Historically speaking, thatitmargin was less large than most. 

The point is ... he lost the popular vote. That only happened four times in U.S. history and when that happens, the sane winner acknowledges that he needs to UNITE the nation, not the divide it even more, because the majority didn't even vote for him. trump is abnormal in this and so many other ways.

It's relevant here for two reasons.

First of all the fascist trump promised a full Muslim ban in the campaign. It's documented by Guiliani that he explored how he could do it legally but there was no way, so what he did now was a second choice less than full Muslim ban. The majority of the American people were never for such a fascist un-American Muslim ban. Again, he playacts that he has a mandate that he never had. Is it any wonder there have been PROTESTS constantly from day one of his horrific early presidency? 

 

 

JT, he DOES HAVE A MANDATE, under the existing system.   He was elected President!!  Let that be the end of It.

 

Once again, this  thread Is NOT about the election result.

 

If the deplorable Clinton had got over the line, under the same terms, and opened the floodgates to those from the countries Trump has banned movement from to the US, the right would have whined a bit, but that would have been the end of It.

 

The left riot!  What are they thinking?  Not capable of any thought, much less rational thought, I suspect.

Edited January 31, 2017 by F4UCorsair

[F4UCorsair]

1 hour ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

There was I thinking ... the Thirty Years' War ... the Troubles in Northern Ireland ... the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre ... Buddhist persecution of the Rohingyas in Myanmar ... Hindu attacks on Moslems during the Partition and then later in India (the basis of the BJP political party). Shall I go on? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_persecution

SLB, that was then....this Is now.

 

Do you want to go back to  the crusades??

 

Islam's threat, and worse, Is here and now.

[SaintLouisBlues]

10 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

SLB, that was then....this Is now. Do you want to go back to  the crusades?? Islam's threat, and worse, Is here and now.

Nope, the Troubles are recent enough, and the Buddhist persecution in Myanmar is happening right now. However I take heart from your Panglossian view of the advance of Western civilisation

[F4UCorsair]

7 minutes ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Nope, the Troubles are recent enough, and the Buddhist persecution in Myanmar is happening right now. However I take heart from your Panglossian view of the advance of Western civilisation

 

 

Amusing!!

[Andaman Al]

39 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

SLB, that was then....this Is now.

 

Do you want to go back to  the crusades??

 

Islam's threat, and worse, Is here and now.

Northern Ireland  troubles (the terrorists funded by the USA) finished 20 years ago, that isn't really distant. You want us to remember the holocaust? you want us to remember the 2977 people killed on 9/11 yet you ask us to ignore and forget the 3 637 people that died in the Northern Ireland troubles? Not Amusing !

 

You are correct, Islam's threat is here and now.....and as you say 'worse'. For the 'worse' look within, for it is a home grown enemy that now controls your highest offices. Either watch and weep or do something about it. Many are choosing to do something about it.

Edited January 31, 2017 by Andaman Al

[JetsetBkk]

3 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

This is the view of good Americans who know where they are from and who they owe it to.

 

 

 

 

Thanks very much for this Al. Haven't had such a good laugh since watching Chuck Schumer's crocodile tears. Hilarious. Please post more.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 hours ago, Thakkar said:

 

The thing is, if you scratch below the surface of many anti-immigration talk, here on TVF, on Fox or Breitbart or some talk radio or even the comments sections of the Guardian—it looks a lot like cover for racism and religious bigotry.

Unfortunately, I think what you say above is entirely correct.

 

But as I think you also can understand, it is possible to simply have a genuine interest in the U.S. not unwittingly importing Islamic fundamentalism (which I think is entirely incompatible with U.S. culture and beliefs), without being a racist or religious bigot.  Hence my looking for an opportunity for regular, non-fundamentalist Muslims who genuinely want to be part of the U.S. and what it has to offer.

 

That's what I found concerning about the notion under Obama and HRC that the U.S. was going to admit masses of Muslim refugees simply because they qualified as refugees. But, it was never clear to me how the U.S. government was going to vet those folks. Obviously, they were going to be looking to exclude anyone who had connections to terrorism.  But whether holding Islamic fundamentalist beliefs (or even checking for that) was something that ever was going to be assessed, that I don't know.

 

It certainly seems, that the various European countries did not do a very good job of excluding Muslim fundamentalists in their handling of Middle East refugees. And now they're paying a heavy price for that.

 

T

[Thakkar]

33 minutes ago, JetsetBkk said:

Chuck Schumer's crocodile tears.

Senator Schumer's great grandmother and 7 of her 9 children were murdered by Nazis.
Trump's father was arrested at a Ku Klux Klan rally.

[Jingthing]

Senator Schumer's great grandmother and 7 of her 9 children were murdered by Nazis.
Trump's father was arrested at a Ku Klux Klan rally.

That's it in a nutshell.

[Thakkar]

35 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Unfortunately, I think what you say above is entirely correct.

 

But as I think you also can understand, it is possible to simply have a genuine interest in the U.S. not unwittingly importing Islamic fundamentalism (which I think is entirely incompatible with U.S. culture and beliefs), without being a racist or religious bigot.  Hence my looking for an opportunity for regular, non-fundamentalist Muslims who genuinely want to be part of the U.S. and what it has to offer.

 

That's what I found concerning about the notion under Obama and HRC that the U.S. was going to admit masses of Muslim refugees simply because they qualified as refugees. But, it was never clear to me how the U.S. government was going to vet those folks. Obviously, they were going to be looking to exclude anyone who had connections to terrorism.  But whether holding Islamic fundamentalist beliefs (or even checking for that) was something that ever was going to be assessed, that I don't know.

 

It certainly seems, that the various European countries did not do a very good job of excluding Muslim fundamentalists in their handling of Middle East refugees. And now they're paying a heavy price for that.

 

T

Some nuance and perspective is called for.

Only something like 1% of refugees are ever settled in Western countries. Even fewer are Muslim refugees and even fewer are settled in the United States.

 

That's the context.

 

The vetting process is extremely rigorous and takes 18-24 months. For a humorous, but entirely serious look at that, nothing beats Samantha Bee:

 

 

 

Secondly, refugees aren't immigrants. They are fleeing for their lives. They often have endured years of hardship and danger both in their own countries and in refugee camps before even beginning the vetting process. There are international conventions that the US and others have signed on the treatment of refugees and these need to be adhered to unless one wants to turn back the civilizing tides of history.

 

the recent situation in Europe is an unusual situation brought about b a confluence of a whole host factors including, but not limited to the illegal Iraq war, the disintegration of Libya, the Arab Spring. It would be too OT to get into here. But, under the pressure of hoards of destitute people already at Europe's doorstep, Merkel did the humanitarian thing.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, Thakkar said:

the recent situation in Europe is an unusual situation brought about b a confluence of a whole host factors including, but not limited to the illegal Iraq war, the disintegration of Libya, the Arab Spring. It would be too OT to get into here. But, under the pressure of hoards of destitute people already at Europe's doorstep, Merkel did the humanitarian thing.

 

That gets at the issue I was mentioning above with Europe. For me, just being a "refugee" alone ought NOT be a ticket of entry to the U.S. (Meaning, just having refugee status shouldn't be cause to ignore other considerations.)  From my view, if a "refugee" from whatever circumstance holds Islamic fundamentalist views, then they ought not be re-settled in the U.S. period.

 

There are plenty of Muslim and Muslim fundamentalist areas in the world.  If that's the belief (Islamic fundamentalism) any refugee wants to adhere to, let them find refuge with their kindred Muslim souls -- but not in the U.S.

 

I believe in being humanitarian, but not if it means bringing into the U.S. people who fundamentally are opposed to the U.S. and pretty much everything it stands for.

 

Maybe Merkel (and the other European leaders like her) was trying to do the "humanitarian" thing, but in the end, she seriously damaged her country and her own political future. That's not a mistake I want to see the U.S. repeat -- regardless of the humanitarian issues involved.

 

The Saudis among other Muslim countries have lots of money and they love fundamentalism. Let them become home for fundamentalist refugees.

 

Edited January 31, 2017 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[JetsetBkk]

1 hour ago, Thakkar said:

Senator Schumer's great grandmother and 7 of her 9 children were murdered by Nazis.
Trump's father was arrested at a Ku Klux Klan rally.

 

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

That's it in a nutshell.

 

Totally irrelevant.

 

Keep trying.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, JetsetBkk said:

 

 

Totally irrelevant.

 

Keep trying.

It's actually not especially considering the agenda that 45 has taken up which appeals so much to white supremacists, KKK, Nazis, alt-right, etc. His father would be very proud of much more than him being president. 

[FrankThai]

This is excellent news.   About time we stop terrorists from coming to America.

[KhonKaenKowboy]

[FrankThai]

18 hours ago, LammyTS1 said:

 

 

Can you honestly debate the fact that he is already fulfilling all his promises?

Would you prefer that he allows Islamist extremists into the US to the detriment of American people?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

Exactly.

 

Trump is AWESOME!

 

Trump - President for Life!

 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, KhonKaenKowboy said:

So trump should copy what happened to the Jewish refugees from Hitler? Are you freakin' tripping?!? That's your justification? I think I will go vomit now. 

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, FrankThai said:

 

Exactly.

 

Trump is AWESOME!

 

Trump - President for Life!

 

I see him more as a death force. 

Kill the environment. 

Kill the sick and poor with health care changes.

Kill the arts except pervy beauty pageants and reality t.v.

It goes on and on. 

Edited January 31, 2017 by Jingthing

[nuakmuaynina]

20 minutes ago, FrankThai said:

This is excellent news.   About time we stop terrorists from coming to America.

But it isn't though. Most Terrorists are either home grown or from other countries not included in the ban.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

 

23 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

So trump should copy what happened to the Jewish refugees from Hitler? Are you freakin' tripping?!? That's your justification? I think I will go vomit now. 

 

Jing, I think you and I probably agree on about 95% of anything I've ever seen us discussing here regarding politics.  But on this issue, we obviously differ.

 

I don't think your comparison with the Jews and Hitler is a fair or apt one. In that circumstance, Jewish refugees who would have been saved and/or resettled weren't going to be a threat to anyone (except in the eyes of anti-Semites).

 

In this circumstance, you just have to look at what's happened with Muslim refugees in Germany, France, Belgium, Sweden, etc., rising crime levels, enclaves of extremism, acts of terrorism, and you'd have to be crazy to want to see the U.S. go down that same road.

 

Certainly not all Muslims are terrorists or extremists. But obviously Europe did a pretty piss poor job of weeding out those who were or who were inclined toward radicalization.  No one has proven to me that Immigration policies under Obama and HRC would have saved the U.S. from the damage that Europe has suffered.

 

Trump's a loon, a danger as U.S. president, and I don't agree with him on pretty much anything.  And the exact way he adopted the 7-nations ban and the details of it may not be the best. But between Trump and HRC, I'd have to give Trump the edge (holding my nose) as someone who's more likely to prevent the importation of Islamic fundamentalism to the U.S.

 

Throughout this whole discussion and debate here, I don't believe anyone who's opposed Trump's policy has been willing to make a fact-based, reasonable argument that the U.S. under Obama and HRC was going to do better than Europe did in terms of preventing the importation of Islamic fundamentalism.

 

 

Edited January 31, 2017 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[elliss]

22 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

BTW, as regards what is and isn't considered Islamic fundamentalist terrorism..

 

Islamic  people   do not condone IS terrorism .

     Fight fire  , with fire . Pacifism has  failed .

Trump is our  last chance, for the survival of the free World . 

           Obama  , has sweet talked us  for too long , we need  action , Asap .

Edited January 31, 2017 by elliss