The new refugee policy announced by President Trump on Friday is unconstitutional and inhumane. It is also completely unnecessary.
Trump’s executive order suspends the entry of refugees into the United States for 120 days. The order also indefinitely stops the admission of Syrian refugees and for 90 days bars individuals from seven predominantly Muslim countries: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. Possibly due to poor drafting, the Department of Homeland Security said the order applies to green card holders reentering the United States. It has already resulted in chaos as travelers have been kept off flights to the United States or stranded at airports.
On Saturday night, a federal judge in New York issued a temporary stay, allowing green card or visa holders detained at airports to enter the country. The judge declared that the challengers have a “strong likelihood” of prevailing in showing that the Trump order violates due process and equal protection.
Trump’s action, determining one’s ability to enter the country based on nationality and place of residence, is illegal. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 explicitly says that no person can be “discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth or place of residence.” This act was adopted to eliminate the prior practice of immigration quotas from specific countries. Indeed, in signing the legislation, President Lyndon Johnson said that “the harsh injustice” of the national-origins quota system had been “abolished.”
Absent a specific authorization by Congress, the government cannot discriminate based on nationality or place of residence, which is exactly what Trump ordered.
Moreover, the Trump policy is unconstitutional discrimination based on religion. The Supreme Court repeatedly has said that above all, the 1st Amendment’s religion clauses forbid the government from favoring one religion over others. Although Trump’s executive order does not expressly exclude Muslims, that is obviously its purpose and its effect as it bans refugees from predominantly Muslim countries. It also instructs Homeland Security, after the 120-day period, to prioritize refugee claims “made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.” (Emphasis mine.)
What does that mean? Trump told Christian Broadcast News that he intended to give priority to Christians. The Constitution does not allow such religious discrimination or permit the government to assume that a person is more likely to be dangerous because of his or her religion, national origin or race.
Barring individuals fleeing persecution from entering the United States is simply inhumane. Adding irony to injury, Trump’s executive order was issued on Holocaust Remembrance Day, which should have been an occasion to atone for turning away refugees during the 1930s — some of whom later died in concentration camps. For example, in 1939, the United States turned away the St. Louis, a boat filled with refugees, many of them German Jews. According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 254 passengers from the St. Louis died in the Holocaust.
Like many American Jews, I had relatives die in the Holocaust because they could not get out of Nazi-occupied Europe and no other country would take them.
One of the most astounding aspects of Trump’s executive order is that he seems to have singled out countries where he has no business interests, while giving a reprieve to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, among others, where the Trump Organization is active.
The order is also nonsensical in that foreigners from the seven listed nations killed exactly zero Americans in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1975 and the end of 2015, according to the Cato Institute. None of the terrorists from the 9/11 attacks or the Boston Marathon bombing or the San Bernardino shooting or the Orlando, Fla., massacre came from the seven countries listed. The home countries of those responsible were not included.[...]
What we've got here is a failure to discriminate.
ReplyDeleteJews in Europe in the '30's did not go around bombing and shooting innocents. Despite the propaganda about "Jewish bankers", Jews were not intent on taking over the world through financial conquest. There were nations that were trying to take over the world through violent conquest. The Japanese. The Germans. Not the Jews.
Fast forward to the present. We have a pattern, a rather obvious pattern, of people who identify as Muslims murdering people on U.S. soil.
A while back I reviewed a fascinating video online. It was a kind of seminar with some experts on Islam. One of them -- a young, pony tailed academic, without any obvious political agenda -- made a real impression as having a grasp of the material.
This speaker said that "jihad" is not an obligation among all Muslims. This elicited surprise from another panelist. But the speaker stood his ground. He said a Muslim may choose "jihad", but he/she doesn't have to engage in jihad if they don't want to.
So now it makes sense to me when people say that most Muslims aren't violent. But I don't care about that when it comes to restricting their access to get into the U.S., because Islam is apparently a religion where, historically, a certain percentage have chosen Jihad.
And those who do choose it can't claim that they shouldn't be discriminated against. Yes, they should be discriminated against. They belong to a group that has jihad as a legitimate option of behavior if a member of that group so chooses.
And don't mouth off at me about how discrimination is illegal. The Constitution and the laws that are passed as part of the constitutional government are not a suicide pact.
We are at war, sir! Maybe deaths of civilians by Muslims are accepted as part of everyday happenings in other countries by the people who live there. But the American people elected Mr. Trump precisely because he wasn't going to tolerate one killing by a foreign Muslim of a U.S. citizen. And he is now doing what it takes to try and ensure that.
The author is misleading in his "zero Americans" killed statement. Consider the following quote:
ReplyDelete"Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the group’s branch in Yemen, has long been seen by American intelligence and counterterrorism officials as among the most dangerous branches of the global terrorist network, and the one posing the most immediate threat to United States territory. The group’s leaders have sought in at least three cases to detonate bombs hidden aboard American commercial jetliners. All of those plots were thwarted."
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/world/middleeast/american-commando-killed-in-yemen-in-trumps-first-counterterror-operation.html?_r=0&referer=https://news.google.com/
This is the first step of a descent into dictatorship:
ReplyDeleteNBC is reporting that the document was not reviewed by DHS, the Justice Department, the State Department, or the Department of Defense, and that National Security Council lawyers were prevented from evaluating it. Yesterday, the Department of Justice gave a “no comment” when asked whether the Office of Legal Counsel had reviewed Trump’s executive orders—including the order at hand. (OLC normally reviews every executive order.)
So we basically have Steve Bannon sitting on his own writing up executive orders for the President to sign, and refusing to allow any other government agency to review it. In addition, the CBP are apparently defying the orders of Federal judges staying the order, and are even refusing to allow members of Congress to meet with those detained, seemingly upon orders from the White House.
I am waiting for all those who decried Obama's use of executive orders to protest this even more loudly than they protested his orders, which were at least reviewed by other departments to check for their legality.
Please read this.
ReplyDeletehttps://lawfareblog.com/malevolence-tempered-incompetence-trumps-horrifying-executive-order-refugees-and-visas
The order explains that it is to remain in force until proper safeguards are implaced to prevent the entry of terrorists. Makes sense to me. If it's unconstitutional to profile potential killers, perhaps its time to tweak the constitution.
ReplyDeleteAnd then there is the elevation of Bannon to the primary spot in NSC meetings, to the exclusion of the Joint Chief of Staff. As a comparison, Bush never let Karl Rove even sit in on NSC meetings, to remove even the appearance that life and death decisions would involve a political calculus.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/mccain-bannon-nsc-234329
As mentioned in the article the measures that exist have prevented terrorist attacks from these countries
ReplyDeleteSo aside from declaring all Moslems as suspected terrorist s and saying they are second class human beings and therefore justifying extremists what has Trump accomplished?
This is purporting to solve a problem that does not exist. Whatever safeguards that have been implemented by Bush and Obama have been remarkably effective in keeping out terrorists.
ReplyDeleteTerrorism is gauged not only by those who implement attacks but by the citizenry sympathetic to such attacks. Indiscriminately importing Muslims into a country establishes a fifth column in its midst. Take a look at Europe.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what avraham avinu would have said about this? Perhaps, why should millions of innocent refugees suffer because of a few? Anyway some Americans seem to feel the same way:
ReplyDeletehttps://thinkprogress.org/starbucks-epic-response-to-trumps-executive-order-a9d2cd8f9786#.be1ozprij
Glasgow vet caught in US flight ban
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-38786119
the issue is simple - is this measure providing needed security or is not only doesn't help security but it promotes the rage which reeds terrorism.
ReplyDeleteIf you are concerned about sympathy with terrorism - what why aren't the Palestinians being banned?
The Palestinians are already in Israel. Trump is keeping dangerous people out.
ReplyDeletewhat is misleading?. That the current measures have been successful? Why didn't Trump say that all countries from which Terrorist attacks have come or their parents came should be banned? We would end up closing all airports and building a wall all around America. Of course that doesn't help against those who are already here. So we should export all national origins and religious and political beliefs that have been associated with terror attacks.
ReplyDeleteWe should also imprison or deport all people with mental illness which have been associated with Terrorist attacks!
I hope you are serious! The Germans and other anti-Semites did in fact view Jews as a serious danger to society - and did view them as trying to achieve world dominance. So logically you should find no difference between the actions of the Nazis against the Jews and Trump against the Moslems - they were just trying to rationally protect their society.
ReplyDeleteDiscarding all norms of civilization because of the claim that we are in lock down mode - doesn't in fact help our security. The same applies to his wall against Mexico. Saying there is a problem doesn't justify any and all actions that can be taken in the name of a solution. This is producing a hysteria which justifies Trump is becoming a dictator accountable to no one - because he will claim that it is necessary to save us. All dictators and tyrants have made similar claims. There needs to be a rule of law and action based on evidence and reason. There needs to be checks and balances. They system so far is no perfect but it has been very successful and certainly more successful that the "Utopian America First" that Trump is selling
America has not been "indiscriminately importing Muslims." They have been using many tools to prevent terrorists form entering, and have almost entirely successful. More people are killed in a week in car accidents in the U.S. than have been killed by non-U.S. citizen terrorists in the last 15 years.
ReplyDeleteAn article by a conservative why Trump's fatal character flaws are a problem as President - even if you agree with his inhumane and immoral policies.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/a-clarifying-moment-in-american-history/514868/?utm_source=hpfb
We have had attacks in Fort Hood, San Bernardino, Boston, and Orlando to name a few. The source of all of these attacks has been unvetted Muslims. It is totally insane to not do something to insure the safety of the American public by limiting the access of radical Muslims to American shores. This sobbing screed published by an extreme Leftist bleeding heart idiot is just what the Jihadists ordered.
ReplyDeleteThe current liberal voter loading mass importation of unvetted Muslims to alter the voting demographic is extremely dangerous and has led to extreme violence and disruption in America and many European countries. The immigration must stop until sufficient methods of determining who is safe can be achieved.
This approach is a tremendous improvement over the hear no evil, see no evil and say no evil wickedness of the Obama administration that denied any connection to Jihad of all the attacks against America. All the devious reporting about the poor Muslims (such as those wonderful ones that killed Rabbi Twersky z"l may Hashem yinkom damo) is evil dressed as mercy.
All muslim countries should have the limitations applied and the fact that it has been only a few should be corrected to full expansion.
Trump is finally the right person to apply these principles unlike the Leftist influenced fools that have starting from Bush that have led America into Jihad disaster.
According to your reasoning America won't be safe untl all Moslems are deported
ReplyDeleteIs that your position?
You are, yet again, without the facts. The sources of those attacks were American citizens. Any Muslim coming to the country has undergone intense scrutiny for years already. Pop quiz: How many terror attacks have been carried out on U.S. soil since 9/11 by non-citizen Muslims? I don't know if it is zero, but it is definitely less than five. There is no "mass importation of unvetted Muslims." That is simply BS, pardon my French.
ReplyDeleteAmerica won't be safe until the Muslims here are put under surveillance and radical groups such as Cair are strictly monitored. All Muslims coming into the country should be strictly vetted and then be let in.
ReplyDeleteAny Muslims with Jihadist tendencies or sympathies should be immediately deported.
Immigration should be changed to emphasize immigrants from non Muslim countries and more Western countries in general. Muslim immigration should be strongly limited.
Didn't Rav Kanievsky shlita say that we should not hire workers that are dangerous to us?
Take a look at the "Clarion" site for reliable info of how extremist Muslims are trying to take over the US. Much of the info is from moderate Muslims.
ReplyDeleteyou are claiming that no vetting goes on now but they left in everyone?!
ReplyDeleteyou are claiming that all those who represent danger should be exiled? Do you want to get rid of all teen age drivers? Anyone who was arrested for driving under the influence of drugs or alchohol? What about all those who are child molester or have anger issues?
The point is that if your justification is that these people are dangerous - than you need to ascertain the source of all those who represent danger, grade them as to the degree of danger and exile or deny entry to all those who have a certain likelihood of harming.
Instead you are starting from one population (Moslems) and saying they all are dangerous and must be denied entry or exiled. Please provide the information you used to show that this population in fact represents the highest danger of all.
Just curious? Ever heard of the twin concepts of Darb al Harb and Dar all Islam , and how Muslims are instructed to interact with the Kufar in Darb all Harb? What of their prophet Mohammed, "God's apostle " and his treatment of Jews that came under his domination? Can you be that naive?
ReplyDeletePay attention to all the Muslim based violence and terrorism going on in the world including the horrific attacks in America, France and Israel.
ReplyDeleteWhen you mentioned teenage drivers you forgot to mention cockroaches. Get real. We're talking about life threatening dangers to vast swaths of the American public.
Muslim terrorism and coercion increase with growing population
https://heavenawaits.wordpress.com/muslim-behavior-with-population-increase/
Why are so many French Jews moving from France to Israel as the Muslim population grows.
The percentage of the Muslim world that is ready for violent Jihad.
The final golus will be Yishmael.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7TAAw3oQvg
you are missing the point. We are talking about the situation in America. See the http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2017/01/former-intel-official-trump-immigration.html
ReplyDeleteyou are the one who is naive.
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.com/2017/01/former-intel-official-trump-immigration.html
You write:
ReplyDelete"The Germans and other anti-Semites did in fact view Jews as a serious danger to society - and did view them as trying to achieve world dominance. So logically you should find no difference between the actions of the Nazis against the Jews and Trump against the Moslems - they were just trying to rationally protect their society."
My response: ?!?!?!
You are saying that in light of people distorting the truth, we must take only actions that would make sense according to those distorted truths. So the fact that The Muslims do have Jihod in their doctrine and many follow that path, whereas The Jews have no such ideas, doesn't matter. In a world of political correctness, we must present only such views that have correctness which works well with distortions of the truth.
If we do use the truth as a guide, than your statement is absurd. The Germans yemach shemam were viciously lying to consider The Jews a danger to society.
your statement only makes sense if you truly believe that all or most Moslems would kill non-Moslems. If you really believe that I assume you would say the same about Christians given their history of persecuting Jews. Thus if you live in a Christian country you should at least exclude all Moslems and if you live in a Moslem country you should work to exclude all Christians.
ReplyDeleteThe alternative is to make sure that the laws and institutions in your society are designed to protect all citizens. That is what exists in American and it seems to be working pretty well. Trump's program is designed to create divisions between different groups and thus makes anger and hatred between groups that much stronger - and the people much less secure than before.
To answer your first paragraph:
ReplyDeleteIn our current situation, of the 2 groups you mentioned, only The Muslims are actually posing a threat.
To answer your second paragraph:
What you are saying as far as the best approach is certainly a valid and reasonable opinion. I don't think anyone can accurately predict and know for sure which approach will work best. But I was not addressing which approach works best. I was addressing your statement that because The Germans lied and called Jews a threat, that makes their persecution of The Jews the same as the distancing of The Muslim, who are truly a threat, not in some vicious hate agenda, but in true real life fact. I called you out on that analogy and I remain.
First of all anything idiot, liar Morrell says is totally worthless and he was a total failure in his role as evidenced by the Benghazi disaster. He is a blatant liar and blamed Benghazi on the stupid video which was shown to play no role at all.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/08/07/former-cia-director-mike-morrell-lying-liar-video/
Additionally, his argument that we are getting Isis angry is totally brain dead. Isis without any other incentive, is looking feverishly to attack us and will stop at nothing. San Bernardino and Orlando were probably Isis based attacks.
The fact that a tremendous percentage of Muslims around the world are active Jihadists as Ben Shapiro has illustrated means that that percentage would also apply to those that are brought into America.
The more Muslims that are in a country, they are more violent and virulent. Just review recent events in Germany and France and you will see that it is true. Why should that be brought into America except for pushing Leftist votes or to satisfy Obama the Muslim?
For Jews it is especially bad. Brooklyn College, which used to be a top destination for Jews, has now been rated as one of the most anti Semitic and anti Israel schools.
https://crownheights.info/jewish-news/551719/study-brooklyn-college-hotspot-of-anti-semitism/
The only problem with Trump's ban is that it is too limited.
saying some is truly a threat is just going around in circles. If you understood the fear Germans had for Jews than you would understand that Jews were truly a threat to German society as understood by the Nazis. The fact that the Germans were sick people doesn't change that from their sick perspective Jews were dangerous.
ReplyDeleteIt is clear that the vetting processes in place has worked. Trump's press secretary seems to think that no vetting is going on and that Trump is introducing this a new idea. It isn't.
You have to show that people who have been vetted and are now living in the U.S. are dangerous and therefore Trump's ban is a rational response to that concern.
No the only problem with Trump's ban is that you don't understand why it is nonsense. Calling those who disagree with your assessments isn't very convincing.
ReplyDeleteEven in Israel they are concerned with increasing Arab anger. One of the reasons that the moving the U.S. embassy to Jersualem is not viewed as simply changing the zipcode.
According to you they don't need an incentive = you are really naive.
You haven't paid attention to the secret importation of Muslims orchestrated by Obama.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wnd.com/2016/11/obama-fast-tracks-plan-to-take-muslim-migrants-rejected-by-australia/
This is only one example. Here's another
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/99-muslim-43000-somali-refugees-settled-in-us-under-obama/article/2608316
you are missing the point.
ReplyDeleteWe don't want America to become like many parts of Europe where due to Muslim migration it is advised to walk around without a yarlmuka.
seriously what are you smoking? Is your hatred for Trump suicidal??
Why don't you look up how many Muslims from the US tried or actually joined ISIS. Take a look at Minnesota at the major Somalian problem there.
ReplyDeleteDid you see the videos if Muslims taking pictures of Yeshiva buildings on Brooklyn?
If you know anybody that lives in Brooklyn, ask them if they feel comfortable walking down Coney Island Avenue between Avenues 18 and I.
Stop with the politically correct BS. Many of these migrants hate you and if they themselves wouldn't murder you are sympathetic to those terrorists that would. Wake up...
It would be counter productive for ISIS to have their operatives attack the first moment they land on US soil....
ReplyDeleteThe primary responsibility of the US president is to protect Americans, not to bring in possibly dangerous migrants.
There are many Arab countries these migrants can go to that share the same culture....
Look at Europe, it's a complete mess over there. Why would the US be so foolish to follow in their footsteps?
The intelligence heads have agreed that there is no reliable way to properly vet most of the migrants as the countries they are coming from have governments in total disarray....
Oy vey! It's that racist Nazi Trump! Forget about Jihadis threatening to kill or enslave every last Kufar in the west. We all know that white , Christian conservatives are a far greater threat!
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you read the article about Morrell before you bring him as proof of anything.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, your argument about Israel which is led by compromised Leftist anti Jewish military leaders, who no longer have any stomach for the difficult situation that Israel is in is to hope for some momentary relief by not attacking them. This never works and has the reverse effect. The Oslo accords, giving away Gaza and all other conciliatory acts only emboldened them and that's the reality of the situation.
This video says it all
ReplyDeletehttp://www.truthrevolt.org/news/paul-joseph-watson-truth-about-trumps-muslim-ban
As usual, you have it all wrong, and Morrell is not the "brain dead" one. No one thinks that the problem with this ban is that ISIS will hate us even more now and decide to carry out attacks. The point is that ISIS has a limited number of adherents, and therefore is limited in its capabilities. Increase the number of their adherents by turning this into an anti-Muslim war, and you increase their capabilities. San Bernadino and Orlando are precisely the reason why this ban is a horrible idea. Those attacks were not "ISIS," as you claim. Rather, they were committed by American Muslims who became radicalized, who pledged allegiance to ISIS when carrying out their attacks. According to intelligence experts, a ban such as this one is apt to radicalize even more Muslims, as they will (rightfully) see themselves as persecuted.
ReplyDeleteFortunately for the world you are not in position to implement your beliefs
ReplyDeleteWhich intelligence heads?
ReplyDeleteAccording to you why didn't Trump ban all Moslems and order the expulsion of all that are in already?
Point is that Trumps ban is not the solution but simply makes problem worse!
ReplyDeleteYou don't get it
ReplyDeleteIt is that the ban Trump instituted won't save lives but endangers them
Identifying a problem doesn't justify all responses
My criticism is with his solution
You know how many Americans have been killed in terror attacks on U.S. soil by immigrants from those seven countries since 1975?
ReplyDeleteI will give you a minute to guess.
Zero.
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=30718
Trump is a man who sees things in simplistic terms, as do his primary voters. A ban on Muslims was a good applause line in his campaign, so he thinks that must mean it is a good idea to implement it. The fact that he did not consult with his Secretary of Defense, his nominee for State, overruled the Department of Homeland Security, and on, and on, further shows how this is an ill-considered action taken without the support of anyone with experience in national security issues.
What's wrong with the ban? What's your solution?
ReplyDeletehttp://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8593438
ReplyDeletejust one of the many articles saying such... quoting Clapper and Comey.... in which they were going against Obama, so they probably toned it down....
It's also common sense... Can you explain how such vetting might work?
C'mon, there's obviously quite a difference between throwing people out of the country and placing a temporary ban on some countries. Just look at the opposition he's facing with this....
Thankfully we have Trump in charge to not implement your warped view.
ReplyDeleteYour living in la la land if you think that the worlds Muslims need any more reason to hate us than our disregard of Islam and our opposition to global Jihad. Thank goodness your voice is one of those of the losers who wish to follow Obama's failed approach and leave us in mortal danger. Trump will not allow us to follow this victim mentality.
ReplyDeleteWhat planet are you living on? What mortal danger? Please, please, use your Google machine and find out how many Americans were killed on U.S. soil by terrorists under Obama, and how many were killed by white mass murderers during the same period. More were killed in the U.S. by toddlers accidentally discharging firearms than by terrorists during that time. So, do you want to round up all the toddlers? It is the manner of demagogues to try to convince people that they are much worse off than they are, so that they can enter with their strong-arm tactics to "save the day." It has apparently worked on you, in spades.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to know what is wrong with the ban, please read this.
ReplyDeletehttps://lawfareblog.com/malevolence-tempered-incompetence-trumps-horrifying-executive-order-refugees-and-visas
On what basis, do you call Morell an "idiot, liar", while at the same time idolizing Trump? Would you call Trump the same thing - giving the ample evidence to that effect?
ReplyDeleteDo you have any Muslim friends?
ReplyDeleteI know that I'm living on Earth but you apparently are living in fantasyland. Did you count the 3,000 that were killed in 9/11? You obviously choose to ignore the blatant facts staring you in the face of the percentage of Muslims ready to do Jihad. Ben Shapiro provides the numbers at the end of this post.
ReplyDeleteYou have swallowed too much of the Leftist fantasy of Kumbaya that everyone is peaceful and wonderful and no evil can come of them. The reality is that even if the percentage of Muslims that is dangerous is relatively small (which it isn't) there are many that are ready to commit mass murder of innocents and they should not be let in to the country unless they are strongly vetted and monitored. In the meantime, until a reasonable method of vetting and monitoring can be established it's insane to unleash them on the innocent public and that is clearly the desire of the majority of Americans despite all the unhinged protests.
French Jews are leaving France in droves due to the non loving embrace of the Muslims that are there.
I see no evidence of dangers from your other sources which are not directed at the public at large except for individual crazies for which there is no means to identify up front.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7TAAw3oQvg
A large heap of steaming Liberal lies does not constitute evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe link that I posted where he idiotically claims that the movie was the cause for the Benghazi attack proves that he is both a liar and deranged. Hillary even told her daughter the same night that it wasn't the movie but rather it was terrorists.
Provide some examples of Trump lies and I will identify which ones are pure fiction, which ones are simple mistakes and which are real.
Terrorists which came from the countries recently banned
ReplyDeletehttp://dailycaller.com/2017/01/30/at-least-20-alleged-terrorists-since-2014-came-from-countries-affected-by-trumps-immigration-ban/
The sources of 9/11 terrorists was from which countries?!
ReplyDeleteOrigins of the 19 hijackers
Nationality Number
Saudi Arabia
15
United Arab Emirates
2
Egypt
1
Lebanon
1
Why weren't people from these countries banned?
You need to make a list of terrorists and where they came from and show that the 7 countries in fact supplied the largest number of terrorists.
ReplyDeleteYou also need to notice which terrorists were the result of radicalization of citizens in America, Britain, France and Israel. A ban on the 7 countries is not going to stop home grown terrorists. Furthermore by treating Moslems as 2nd class citizens just provides justification for terrorists without protecting anyone.
Bottom line, the ban is not intelligent and it wasn't applied in a way that would maximize the protection against terrorists. It was an emotional crowd pleaser that Trump and Bannon whipped up.
Caroline Glick explains why Trump's ban on terrorist Muslim states was correct and is not like Roosevelt's blocking of Jews during world war 2.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.truthrevolt.org/commentary/glick-lessons-roosevelts-failures
You're right they should have been. However, Trump continued the ban that Obama started and reactivated it as a starting point.
ReplyDeleteOf course I did not count the 3,000 that were killed in 9/11. That occurred before the vetting process employed by the Bush and Obama administrations were implemented.
ReplyDeleteThe question is not whether or not there are Muslim terrorists who want to carry out attacks and kill Americans. There are. The questions are A: How effective have the vetting procedures been until now, and will the net result of this executive order be positive or negative. The answer to the first question is that they have been about as effective as one could hope for. As for the answer to the second, at least many intelligence and diplomatic officials believe that it will lead to an increase in Jihadists, thereby weakening America's security.
You write: "they should not be let in to the country unless they are strongly vetted and monitored.." I agree 100%. But the fact is that they have been strongly vetted and monitored. The best evidence for this is the absolute paucity of terror attacks on U.S. soil.
There is no point in pointing out Trump's lies. Because I am a progresive, you will not believe me anyway. But this blog has pointed out time and again how Trump has blatantly lied and lied to defend his lies - either intentionally or because of a pathology. If you honestly believe that Trump is less of a liar than well, any President we've had in the last 40 years, then I can only feel sorry for you.
ReplyDeleteno that is not what happened as explained in the article I posted
ReplyDeleteI guess you didn't pay attention to Obama's stream of lies.
ReplyDeleteHere is what the Chief Rabbi of the UK and the Commonwealth, Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis, at the annual dinner of charity World Jewish Relief, said about Trump's cruel refugee ban:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38819813
"President Trump has signed an executive order that seeks to discriminate based totally on religion or nationality," he said. "We as Jews, perhaps more than any others, know what it's like to be the victims of discrimination."
He added: "There are so many millions of refugees who are receiving no hope from the United States of America, of all countries."