Refugees detained at US airports after Trump exec order

Status
Not open for further replies.
joshman1 said:
When it hits you that this isn’t about security but islamohobia and vilification of brown people.
Click to expand...
It is NOT a color thing! I worship at a Maronite Catholic Church mainly Lebanese immigrants and they are NOT brown and they will be having the same problem right now. Lebanon has a lot of Muslims!
 
Herculees said:
It is NOT a color thing! I worship at a Maronite Catholic Church mainly Lebanese immigrants and they are NOT brown and they will be having the same problem right now. Lebanon has a lot of Muslims!
Click to expand...
Lebanon is notamong the listedcountries. Lebanese Muslims ( or Lebanese Christians) can still get visas in the exact same way as before.
 
randomuser said:
FAULTY PREMISE. Saudi Arabia is definitely known to be “soft on terrorism,” considering 9/11, San Bernardino, and Orlando – all Saudi nationals.
Click to expand...
Actually, it is not. When the Saudis receive information*about suspected terrorists, they are generally arrested immediately.

In regards to the recent shooting in Quebec. Can I infer from that shooting that Canada is soft on guns?
 
Brendan said:
Actually, it is not. When the Saudis receive information*about suspected terrorists, they are generally arrested immediately.

In regards to the recent shooting in Quebec. Can I infer from that shooting that Canada is soft on guns?
Click to expand...
Trump’s not the president of Canada. Trump’s the President of The United States, and the all the recent terrorist activity in the U.S. has been done by Saudi nationals --** Saudi Arabia, of course, conspicuously absent from the list of 7 because of Obama** – despite Trump being the president and Trump being the one who’s in charge of DHS now. So, you might as well be doing yoga for all the twisting to explain why Trump is enforcing Obama’s policies when Trump (not Obama) is the president now and we should be expecting “common sense” from Trump.
 
randomuser said:
Trump’s not the president of Canada. Trump’s the President of The United States, and the all the recent terrorist activity in the U.S. has been done by Saudi nationals --** Saudi Arabia, of course, conspicuously absent from the list of 7 because of Obama** – despite Trump being the president and Trump being the one who’s in charge of DHS now. So, you might as well be doing yoga for all the twisting to explain why Trump is enforcing Obama’s policies when Trump (not Obama) is the president now and we should be expecting “common sense” from Trump.
Click to expand...
Common sense also tells us we need Saudi Arabia’s cooperation because of their influence. We are not entangled as much with the other nations; we don’t “need” or “expect” their help.

It’s almost as if liberals and MSM want Trump to pose an actual Muslim ban so they can get even more angry and justify their indignation.
 
EIF5A said:
Common sense also tells us we need Saudi Arabia’s cooperation because of their influence. We are not entangled as much with the other nations; we don’t “need” or “expect” their help.

It’s almost as if liberals and MSM want Trump to pose an actual Muslim ban so they can get even more angry and justify their indignation.
Click to expand...
Not speaking as a liberal, but as an ordinary person, I would like Trump to at least be consistent in his travel ban (although I would prefer no ban at all). Why is Saudi Arabia not on Trump’s list and why is Iran on Trump’s list? The former country contains terrorists who have attacked us, while the latter does not. Further, why no mention, except in passing by Reince Priebus, of Pakistan? In other words, why these seven countries and not others, which are just as dangerous to the U.S.?
 
meltzerboy said:
Not speaking as a liberal, but as an ordinary person, I would like Trump to at least be consistent in his travel ban (although I would prefer no ban at all). Why is Saudi Arabia not on Trump’s list and why is Iran on Trump’s list? The former country contains terrorists who have attacked us, while the latter does not. Further, why no mention, except in passing by Reince Priebus, of Pakistan? In other words, why these seven countries and not others, which are just as dangerous to the U.S.?
Click to expand...
I’m confused as well, although I would like to add those countries to the temporary ban instead of getting rid of the ban completely. Saudi Arabia, I can understand the realities of dirty politics. Not sure about Pakistan.
 
kat07 said:
One of the most striking reports on the vetting of refugees— both because of its content and how the Fake News (mainstream) media ignored it is an October 2015 Glazov Gang interview with Dr. Mudar Zahran, a leader of the Jordanian- Palestinian Opposition Coalition, a Muslim refugee now living as a refugee in Britain. While calling himself an “orthodox Muslim,” he nonetheless issued an eyebrow-raising warning: “Keep the Muslim migrants out of Europe”. While Europe was the focus at the time; Zahran’s warnings absolutely apply to the US. And what he says is troubling: Many if not most of the migrants are not what they appear.

Video below.
youtube.com/watch?v=5OgncR6cewc&feature=youtu.be

This warning has been echoed by other Muslim figures as well. In 2015, Lebanese Education Minister Elias Bou Saab warned 20k jihadis likely lurk in his country’s refugee camps, and Syrian ambassador Riad Abbas stated that 20% of Muslim migrants entering Europe had Islamic State ties.

The reality is that there is no way to reliably vet the Muslim migrants.

Nations such as Syria simply don’t have comprehensive, Western-style databases containing information on their citizens. Intelligence officials have acknowledged this as the has the Greek government, and even former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson. As per Investor’s Business Daily Syria and Iraq, along with Somalia and Sudan, are failed states where police records aren’t even kept. “Agents can’t vet somebody if they don’t have documentation and don’t even have the criminal databases to screen applicants.” investors.com/politics/editorials/no-databases-exist-to-vet-syrian-refugees/

Moreover, what good would the data be? NYC Syrian community leader Aarafat “Ralph” Succar pointed out in 2015 while warning of IS infiltration in the US, you can bribe Syrian public officials and get government documents stating you’re whoever you want to be. “You can go to the Syrian government today and say to them, ‘I need a piece of paper that says I’m Tony Caterpillar.’ And they give it to you,” New York Post - nypost.com/2015/11/19/syrian-community-leader-isis-is-already-in-new-york-city/

As for the notion these migrants can be vetted, Succar has a simple response: “Are you out of your mind?”

Yet even if we could weed out the fakefugees, it wouldn’t matter because vetting informs only about what migrants are, not what they will become or what their children will be.

The math is simple: If 1m Muslim migrants enter a nation over time and just 1/10th of 1% are or will become terrorists, that’s 1k dangerous jihadists. And this estimate is conservative not liberal.

Zahran warned, “I have to be honest; you read Arab magazines and Arab newspapers and they are talking about, ‘Good job! Now we’re going to conquest Europe.’ So it’s not even a secret.” Zahran called this process “the soft Islamic conquest of the West” and noted that what Muslims “couldn’t do in the last 20 years, now the West is doing for us for free and even is paying for it.”

More Muslims have arrived in the US just since 9/11 than did so during our nation’s entire history leading up to it. This, the handiwork of the left, has already resulted in hundreds more Westerners dying in jihadist attacks.
Click to expand...
Boo!!! :eek: 🤷
 
In the news:

Chicago’s Archbishop Calls President Trump’s Immigration Order 'a Dark Moment in U.S. History’
Blase J. Cupich, the Archbishop of Chicago, has come out against Donald Trump’s executive order that bans immigrants from seven predominately Muslim countries, as well as prohibiting Syrian refugees indefinitely.
Cupich posted a statement to the Archdiocese of Chicago’s website Sunday, writing that “This weekend proved to be a dark moment in U.S. history.”
Click to expand...
time.com/4652942/chicago-archbishop-donald-trump-immigration-ban/
 
Who was saying that more should be done to protect Christians and Yazidis and that they should be given preference for entering the US?
In August 2014, the only Yazidi woman in the Iraqi parliament broke down in tears while pleading publicly for the world to save her people from genocide at the hands of the Islamic State. She was due to travel to Washington next week to be honored for her role as a leading human rights activist. But now, along with millions of other innocent people, she is caught up in the Trump administration’s immigration ban.
Click to expand...
Vian Dakhil was set to receive the Lantos Human Rights Prize at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 8. The prize is given by the foundation named after the late Tom Lantos, a Holocaust survivor who championed human rights for decades while serving in the U.S. Congress. Dakhil’s case is a startling example of how the executive order signed by President Trump is having unintended consequences and ensnaring not only those who have no links to terrorism but also those who have risked their lives to fight terrorism in cooperation with the United States.
Click to expand...
washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogin/wp/2017/01/30/yazidi-human-rights-champion-banned-from-coming-to-washington-to-accept-award/?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-f%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.8d36e612dd7c
 
The New York Times is reporting that the acting Attorney General, Sally Yates, has announced that her department will not defend President Trump’s executive order, which she believes to be unlawful.
 
meltzerboy said:
Not speaking as a liberal, but as an ordinary person, I would like Trump to at least be consistent in his travel ban (although I would prefer no ban at all). Why is Saudi Arabia not on Trump’s list and why is Iran on Trump’s list? The former country contains terrorists who have attacked us, while the latter does not. Further, why no mention, except in passing by Reince Priebus, of Pakistan? In other words, why these seven countries and not others, which are just as dangerous to the U.S.?
Click to expand...
Probably Saudi Arabia is not on the list (yet) because it’s a police state that keeps track of people within its borders, and has a way of imprisoning or killing local terrorists. If the Saudis tell us somebody is a bad guy, we can believe it, and had better believe it. Remember, Saudi Arabia offered Bin Ladin to Bill Clinton, but Clinton wouldn’t take him. The Saudis didn’t want him either, and threw him out of the country even though he was a citizen there.

Iran is a closed country and isn’t generous about letting its citizens leave. But it’s also a terrorist sponsor and an avowed enemy of the west, so nobody can ever be certain what kinds of people might be leaving there.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Probably Saudi Arabia is not on the list (yet) because it’s a police state that keeps track of people within its borders, and has a way of imprisoning or killing local terrorists. If the Saudis tell us somebody is a bad guy, we can believe it, and had better believe it. Remember, Saudi Arabia offered Bin Ladin to Bill Clinton, but Clinton wouldn’t take him. The Saudis didn’t want him either, and threw him out of the country even though he was a citizen there.

Iran is a closed country and isn’t generous about letting its citizens leave. But it’s also a terrorist sponsor and an avowed enemy of the west, so nobody can ever be certain what kinds of people might be leaving there.
Click to expand...
The next time a Saudi national attacks the U.S., Trump is going to need to explain how that Saudi national got into the U.S. What a shameful negligence of duty for Trump. Not Obama (who’s not president anymore.) Next Saudi national who shoots up a major city, that’s on Trump.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Probably Saudi Arabia is not on the list (yet) because it’s a police state that keeps track of people within its borders, and has a way of imprisoning or killing local terrorists. If the Saudis tell us somebody is a bad guy, we can believe it, and had better believe it. Remember, Saudi Arabia offered Bin Ladin to Bill Clinton, but Clinton wouldn’t take him. The Saudis didn’t want him either, and threw him out of the country even though he was a citizen there.
Click to expand...
FALSE. That has been debunked time and time again. Individuals aren’t government entities.
 
Hmm, it seems that the country excluded are the countries where Trump has business ties and where the terrorists originated from Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Lebanon, UAE, Pakistan, Egypt

cato.org/blog/guide-trumps-executive-order-limit-migration-national-security-reasons

Trump’s Immigration Ban Excludes Countries With Business Ties
Bloomberg

“President Trump has signed an executive order that bans citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries in the Middle East from entering the United States for 90 days, according to the White House. His proposed list doesn’t include Muslim-majority countries where his Trump Organization has done business or pursued potential deals. Properties include golf courses in the United Arab Emirates and two luxury towers operating in Turkey.”

All the other Muslim countries need to do is promise to build a Trump hotel or golf course to have the ban lifted on their country. It has nothing to do about making the country safer!! :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top