Global backlash grows against Trump's immigration order

[webfact]

Global backlash grows against Trump's immigration order

By Maher Chmaytelli and Lin Noueihed

REUTERS

 

Activists gather outside the White House to protest President Donald Trump's executive actions on immigration in Washington January 29, 2017. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein

 

BAGHDAD/CAIRO (Reuters) - A global backlash against U.S. President Donald Trump's immigration curbs gathered strength on Sunday as several countries including long-standing American allies criticised the measures as discriminatory and divisive.

 

Governments from London and Berlin to Jakarta and Tehran spoke out against Trump's order to put a four-month hold on allowing refugees into the United States and temporarily ban travellers from Syria and six other Muslim-majority countries. He said the move would help protect Americans from terrorism.

 

In Germany - which has taken in large numbers of people fleeing the Syrian civil war - Chancellor Angela Merkel said the global fight against terrorism was no excuse for the measures and "does not justify putting people of a specific background or faith under general suspicion", her spokesman said.

 

She expressed her concerns to Trump during a phone call and reminded him that the Geneva Conventions require the international community to take in war refugees on humanitarian grounds, the spokesman added.

 

Merkel's sentiments were echoed in Paris and London; "Terrorism knows no nationality. Discrimination is no response," said French Foreign minister Jean-Marc Ayrault, while his British counterpart Boris Johnson tweeted: "Divisive and wrong to stigmatise because of nationality."

 

Along with Syria, the U.S. ban of at least 90 days affects travellers with passports from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, including those with dual nationality that includes one of those countries.

 

Trump said his order, which indefinitely bans refugees from Syria, was "not a Muslim ban", though he added he would seek to prioritise Christian refugees fleeing the country.

 

The Arab League - whose members include many of the countries included in the ban as well as allies of Washington such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan - expressed deep concern and said the restrictions were unjustified.

 

The government in Iraq, which is allied with Washington in the battle against ultra-hardline Islamist group Islamic State and hosts over 5,000 U.S. troops, did not comment on the executive order.

 

But some members of its parliament said Baghdad should retaliate with similar measures against the United States.

 

IRAN VOWS TO RESPOND

 

In Baghdad, influential Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said American nationals should leave Iraq, in retaliation for the travel curbs.

 

"It would be arrogance for you to enter freely Iraq and other countries while barring to them the entrance to your country ... and therefore you should get your nationals out," he said on his website.

 

There was no immediate reaction to the curbs from Islamic State, although in the past it has used U.S. monitoring of Muslim foreigners to stoke Muslim anger against Washington.

 

The Tehran government vowed to respond in kind to the U.S. ban on visitors from Iran, but on Sunday Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Twitter that Americans who already hold Iranian visas can enter the country.

 

"Unlike the U.S., our decision is not retroactive. All with valid Iranian visa will be gladly welcomed," Zarif said.

 

Authorities in Sudan, which is also targeted by the ban, summoned the U.S. charge d'affaires in Khartoum. They said the order sent a "negative message", coming two weeks after Washington announced it would ease economic sanctions on the country.

 

Trump's executive order on Friday took effect immediately, wreaking havoc and confusion for would-be travellers with passports from the seven countries and plunging America's immigration system into chaos.

 

The Department of Homeland Security said about 375 travellers had been affected by the order, 109 of whom were in transit and were denied entry to the United States. Another 173 were stopped by airlines before boarding.

 

Fuad Sharef, his wife and three children were among the first victims. They had waited two years for a visa to settle in the United States, selling their home and quitting jobs and schools in Iraq before setting off for a new life they saw as a reward for working with U.S. organisations.

 

They were prevented from boarding their connecting flight to New York from Cairo airport on Saturday, detained overnight and forced to board a flight back to northern Iraq.

 

'I AM TOTALLY BROKEN'

 

"We were treated like drug dealers, escorted by deportation officers," Sharef told Reuters, likening Trump's decision to the dictatorship of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. "I am broken, I am totally broken."

 

A 32-year-old Syrian man, Nail Zain, was among dozens of people at Istanbul's Ataturk Airport prevented from flying to the United States on Sunday. He told Reuters he was supposed to fly to Los Angeles, but officials said his visa was cancelled.

 

"My wife and my son are in the United States. My son has American nationality. And we have been waiting for this moment for two years. Finally when I got the chance, they prevented me as a Syrian passport holder from travelling," he said.

 

He was later taken out of the terminal by authorities.

 

Trump, a businessman who successfully tapped into American fears about militant attacks during his campaign, had promised what he called "extreme vetting" of immigrants and refugees from areas the White House said the U.S. Congress deemed high risk.

He said on Saturday of his order: "It's working out very nicely. You see it at the airports, you see it all over."

 

The travel curbs, however, also drew criticism from several other countries around the globe.

 

In Jakarta, Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi said the Muslim-majority nation deeply regretted Trump's plans for "extreme vetting" of people from some Muslim countries.

 

Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni said "open society, plural identity, no discrimination" were the "pillars of Europe", while the Danish, Swedish and Norwegian governments also registered their opposition.

 

Danish foreign minister Anders Samuelsen tweeted: "The U.S. decision not to allow entry of people from certain countries is NOT fair." 

 

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said his country welcomed those fleeing war and persecution, even as Canadian airlines said they would turn back U.S.-bound passengers to comply with an immigration ban on people from seven Muslim-majority countries.

 

"To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada," he tweeted.

 

(Additional reporting by Andrea Shalal and Andreas Rinke in Berlin, Elizabeth Piper and Paul Sandle in London, Andrew Callus in Paris, Yesim Dikmen in Istanbul, and Arwa Gaballa and Eric Knecht in Cairo; Writing by William Maclean and Pravin Char; editing by Ralph Boulton)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-01-30

[Hayduke]

Ironic that so many of the pure at heart are enraged when denied access to the sinful lifestyle and wicked excesses of the Great Satan.

[Stargeezr]

Good on Trump for trying to protect the people of the United States. Maybe when Merkel loses some of her family to these people she let in, she will change her view, but for now she is still blind.I am ashamed of Trudeau's view as well, he still is not ready!

Geezer

[Ulysses G.]

Many of these countries are Muslim with an Islamic terrorist predicament and other countries are having big problems with their own Muslim immigrants. The United States is not going to make the same mistakes that they have. The temporary ban based on Obama's Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 and 2016 might be adjusted slightly to fix a few problems, but it will stand.

Edited January 30, 2017 by Ulysses G.

[RuamRudy]

9 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

The United States is not going to make the same mistakes that they have. The temporary ban based on Obama's Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 and 2016 will stand.

 

I wonder does anyone else see the irony that if this policy was enacted 17 years ago, the US would still suffer the greatest terrorist act ever to visit its shores?

The people targeted in the current entry ban are not from the countries that attacked the US, but from countries that the US has been illegally bombing and deliberately destabilising for decades.

Edited January 30, 2017 by RuamRudy

[Ulysses G.]

The temporary ban is based on Obama's Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 and 2016. His executive order applied to these predefined “countries of concern”. Trump is not the one who chose which countries are considered the most concerning.

[IAMHERE]

Since I've been traveling to other countries I've found that universally the US is hated. The US loses no love when establishing its borders because it is already vilified around the globe. It is time the US becomes a little more protective of its homeland and isolationist.

[ilostmypassword]

Trump’s Immigration Order Jolts Iraqis, U.S.’s Top Allies Against ISIS

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s executive order on immigration is straining relations with the partner the United States needs most to reclaim the Islamic State’s stronghold in Mosul: the Iraqis.

Iraqi officials were taken aback by the directive, which they learned about through the American news media because they had not been consulted first.

The order blocks citizens from Iraq and six other predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days. That lumps Iraq together with Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, nations with no strategic alliance with Washington.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/politics/donald-trump-immigration-order-iraq.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

The genius has already publicly said during his CIA speech that the USA should have taken Iraq's oil and maybe it will do so in the future.

 Now he violates the Strategic Framework Agreement the USA has with Iraq.

He didn't consult with General Mattis, much less the State Department before he made this move.

How massively incompetent can he be? Yuuugely!

 

Edited January 30, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

The temporary ban is based on Obama's Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 and 2016. His executive order applied to these predefined “countries of concern”. Trump is not the one who chose which countries are considered the most concerning.

 

More dishonest spin. You deliberately obfuscate the difference between and Executive Order and an Act and purposefully misrepresent the Act's intention. The Executive Order bans travel. The Act provides for additional procedures to be imposed for travelers in the visa process.

 

Apologists for acts of hate and division by 45 have no absolutely no morals in fostering their bigotry. Perhaps using some actual facts and truths in the future is advisable.

[ilostmypassword]

16 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

More dishonest spin. You deliberately obfuscate the difference between and Executive Order and an Act and purposefully misrepresent the Act's intention. The Executive Order bans travel. The Act provides for additional procedures to be imposed for travelers in the visa process.

 

Apologists for acts of hate and division by 45 have no absolutely no morals in fostering their bigotry. Perhaps using some actual facts and truths in the future is advisable.

what's more it completely ignores that the reason many of the Muslim countries were excluded from the list was politics.  They deserved to be there but we didn't want to offend the Pakistanis, the Saudies, etc.   Trump was supposed to be different. He was going to put politics aside and play it straight.

And what makes the whole thing even more stupid was that the Obama administration put a pause on letting immigrants in because specific weaknesses were found in the program. Now the vetting already is extreme. Trump's order had no foundation in fact. Just throwing red meat to his supporters. 

[connda]

There is no difference between the current immigration policy in Thailand (Mexico, Central America, South American) then that which is being proposed in the US. And as someone who obeys the immigration laws in my host country, I am completely unsympathetic to those who wish to board the US immigration gravy train.  Nobody every talks about the programs that a currently in place to accommodate those wishing to immigrate to the US or to find seasonal work in agriculture.  Those programs exist, and many foreigns do the right thing and use them.  Kudos to all the seasonal migrates who obtain a visa prior to working in the US.  My hat is off to you all.  But America has the right to limit the flow of immigrant into her country.  And it has the right to vet who it wishes to allow in and who it rejects, especially when certain subsets of migrants are perceived to pose a threat to national security of a country.  More people should study history.
But feel free to protest world citizens for what good it will do over the next 4 to 8 years. 

Edited January 30, 2017 by connda

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, connda said:

There is no difference between the current immigration policy in Thailand (Mexico, Central America, South American) the that which is being proposed in the US. And as someone who obeys the immigration laws in my host country, I am completely unsympathetic to those who wish to board the US immigration gravy train.  Nobody every talks about the programs that a currently in place to accommodate those wishing to immigrate to the US or to find seasonal work in agriculture.  Those programs exist, and many foreigns do the right thing and use them.  Kudos to all the seasonal migrates who obtain a visa prior to working in the US.  My hat is off to you all.  But America has the right to limit the flow of immigrant into her country.  But feel free to protest world citizens for what good it will do over the next 4 to 8 years. 

It's already lead to some backtracking and it looks like it's going to lead to a lot more. And  it's true that the USA has the right to restrict immigration much as it has the right to do lots of stupid things. It doesn't make them less stupid because it has the right to do so.

[connda]

34 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It's already lead to some backtracking and it looks like it's going to lead to a lot more. And  it's true that the USA has the right to restrict immigration much as it has the right to do lots of stupid things. It doesn't make them less stupid because it has the right to do so.

I should be able to immigrate and work in German, Switzerland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, France, England, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Mexico, Costa Rica, Brazil, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, and Thailand.  But for some odd reason as an older, retired, American of modest financial means, I don't qualify to migrate and work in these countries. 
So therefore these countries have "stupid" and "discriminatory" immigration policies? What makes me different from those demanding to be let into the United States unencumbered by current immigration policy too?  It's a rhetorical question. But food for thought! 
 

Edited January 30, 2017 by connda

[Basil B]

I hope many countries follow his lead and ban those who support terrorist organisations...

 

That could mean Trump could be banned from many countries as a supporter of one of the worlds biggest terrorist organisations, the NRA who's actions by opposing, blackmail and bribery of politicians to prevent Gun Control in America has lead to many terror actions in America by Americans...

[ilostmypassword]

11 minutes ago, connda said:

I should be able to immigrate and work in German, Switzerland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, France, England, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Mexico, Costa Rica, Brazil, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, and Thailand.  But for some odd reason as an older, retired, American of modest financial means, I don't qualify to migrate and work in these countries. 
So therefore these countries have "stupid" and "discriminatory" immigration policies? What makes me different from those demanding to be let into the United States unencumbered by current immigration policy to?  It's a rhetorical question. But food for thought! 
 

Nice try at deflection. Nowhere did I say that these countries have stupid policies. Much less did I assert that immigration restrictions are stupid. What I do say is that the restrictions Trump just attempted to impose are stupid and self defeating.  

[elgordo38]

5 hours ago, Hayduke said:

Ironic that so many of the pure at heart are enraged when denied access to the sinful lifestyle and wicked excesses of the Great Satan.

I was going to give you a full like and then thought your statement is perhaps 75% wrong and 25% right sooo here is a quarter like. Sorry to split hairs. I am sure in the future I can give you a full one on one of your comments but not today. 

Edited January 30, 2017 by elgordo38

[elgordo38]

4 hours ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

Maybe when Merkel loses

some of her family to these people she let in, she will change her view,

Hardly likely. These people the rule makers have protection 10 deep unlike you and I. Its like that soap opera "Another World" or something. 

[WaywardWind]

3 hours ago, IAMHERE said:

Since I've been traveling to other countries I've found that universally the US is hated. The US loses no love when establishing its borders because it is already vilified around the globe. It is time the US becomes a little more protective of its homeland and isolationist.

Well, my wife and I have traveled to/lived in/worked in over 40 countries, about a third of which had predominantly Muslim countries, and we have never - not once - felt any hostility because of our nationalities. If anyting, precisely the reverse.

 

Maybe it is something that you are doing which attracts the negativity?

[WaywardWind]

4 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

The temporary ban is based on Obama's Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 and 2016. His executive order applied to these predefined “countries of concern”. Trump is not the one who chose which countries are considered the most concerning.

You might want to explore the Congressional history of that act before placing so much reliance on it.

 

It was previously introduced in the House, and never made it out, so the Republicans attached it to a must pass appropriations bill in order to get it adopted. Typical and routine DC sleight of hand.

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

The temporary ban is based on Obama's Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 and 2016. His executive order applied to these predefined “countries of concern”. Trump is not the one who chose which countries are considered the most concerning.

 But that point will be lost on the fervent anti Trump posters, those who decry all this as racists Trumps policy.

 

They won't mention anything about Obama, and his Act.

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, WaywardWind said:

You might want to explore the Congressional history of that act before placing so much reliance on it.

 

It was previously introduced in the House, and never made it out, so the Republicans attached it to a must pass appropriations bill in order to get it adopted. Typical and routine DC sleight of hand.

 

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 But that point will be lost on the fervent anti Trump posters, those who decry all this as racists Trumps policy.

 

They won't mention anything about Obama, and his Act.

Did you willfully ignore WaywardWind's post or just miss seeing it?

[WaywardWind]

14 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 But that point will be lost on the fervent anti Trump posters, those who decry all this as racists Trumps policy.

 

They won't mention anything about Obama, and his Act.

Reading comprehension difficulties?

 

Pro-Trump folks are blaming it all on Obama, as is the norm, and they rely on the TTPA to bolster their claims.

 

Two problems: the TTPA doesn't say anywhere near what is being touted as justification for these orders banning immigration, and second, the TTPA itself was rammed through Congress by attaching it to the annual appropriations legislation (which was a must pass) after having failed miserably when standing on its own.

[Redline]

6 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I wonder does anyone else see the irony that if this policy was enacted 17 years ago, the US would still suffer the greatest terrorist act ever to visit its shores?

The people targeted in the current entry ban are not from the countries that attacked the US, but from countries that the US has been illegally bombing and deliberately destabilising for decades.

Many of those people gave up their lives to help the USA in fighting wars in their countries with promises of helping them later.  The current vetting process is 6 months to 2 years from these countries.  They are not coming to the USA on boats!  

[dunroaming]

I am writing this slowly as the petition approaches 1,000,000 signatures.  OK it has now topped a million and is still rising at a pace.  Downing Street has said that no matter what, the invitation stands as cancellation would be counter-productive.

 

Can't help but recall Trump saying he was going to heal the divisions and bring America together again.  Reality is that he is destroying any chance of the USA drawing together and sending it spiralling towards civil war.  In fact I think that America is experiencing a type of civil war now.  No guns and uniforms but something far more destructive.  Well done Mr Trump, you have not only succeeded in turning Americans on Americans but also in managing to turn much of the rest of the world against you.

[Redline]

3 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

I am writing this slowly as the petition approaches 1,000,000 signatures.  OK it has now topped a million and is still rising at a pace.  Downing Street has said that no matter what, the invitation stands as cancellation would be counter-productive.

 

Can't help but recall Trump saying he was going to heal the divisions and bring America together again.  Reality is that he is destroying any chance of the USA drawing together and sending it spiralling towards civil war.  In fact I think that America is experiencing a type of civil war now.  No guns and uniforms but something far more destructive.  Well done Mr Trump, you have not only succeeded in turning Americans on Americans but also in managing to turn much of the rest of the world against you.

He does not care about America.  It's plain to see.  His plan is division that has worked temporarily for others throughout modern history.

 

Erich Fromm
The Fear of Freedom
First published in Great Britain in 1942

 

The loss of US power has already begun.  We all knew it would happen, but not in one fell swoop. 

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

I am writing this slowly as the petition approaches 1,000,000 signatures.  OK it has now topped a million and is still rising at a pace.  Downing Street has said that no matter what, the invitation stands as cancellation would be counter-productive.

 

Can't help but recall Trump saying he was going to heal the divisions and bring America together again.  Reality is that he is destroying any chance of the USA drawing together and sending it spiralling towards civil war.  In fact I think that America is experiencing a type of civil war now.  No guns and uniforms but something far more destructive.  Well done Mr Trump, you have not only succeeded in turning Americans on Americans but also in managing to turn much of the rest of the world against you.

Yes, he is indeed fomenting a kind of new U.S. civil war and it's clear now, it's totally INTENTIONAL. All of his critics, the majority of Americans, are his ENEMIES ... but uh oh, he's got the POWER. 

[CWMcMurray]

There is no difference between the current immigration policy in Thailand (Mexico, Central America, South American) then that which is being proposed in the US. And as someone who obeys the immigration laws in my host country, I am completely unsympathetic to those who wish to board the US immigration gravy train.  Nobody every talks about the programs that a currently in place to accommodate those wishing to immigrate to the US or to find seasonal work in agriculture.  Those programs exist, and many foreigns do the right thing and use them.  Kudos to all the seasonal migrates who obtain a visa prior to working in the US.  My hat is off to you all.  But America has the right to limit the flow of immigrant into her country.  And it has the right to vet who it wishes to allow in and who it rejects, especially when certain subsets of migrants are perceived to pose a threat to national security of a country.  More people should study history.

But feel free to protest world citizens for what good it will do over the next 4 to 8 years. 

I think you are missing part of the point...

The people affected are not illegal aliens..

As you proudly declare 'as someone who obeys the immigration laws in my host country'.. these too were all people following the immigration laws of the USA

They had legal visas that were retroactively cancelled with no notice

So let's say you 'as someone who obeys the immigration laws in my host country' jumped over the border in Poipet to gamble for a few hours, then on the way back into Thailand..

They said sorry , you can't come back in...

But you have a 1 year retirement visa? And are-entry permit?

Everything you own is in your condo that you bought in your name?

All you have is the clothes on your back and your wallet... as you plan on going back home to your condo in Thailand that night

So now you can't come back into Thailand even though you have a valid visa..

Your cool with that?

You don't care about all your stuff in your condo?

I am guessing from your above comments , this is totally ok with you.. just shrug your shoulders and say... oh well... guess its up to Thailand

And walk a way with a smile on your face.. right?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect