Funny Thing About Trump's Muslim, er, Terrorist, er, Refugee, er, Immigrant Ban

[TCassidy]

So wait, is he a Muslim sympathizer or not. Whatever the narrative needs to be I suppose.

Muslim? No.
Sympathetic to Muslims? Yes.

You can't help having empathy toward people you grew up with, and he grew up in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world.

He lived and went to school in Indonesia from the time he was 8 until he was 12. And those are very formative years.

 

[TCassidy]

I wish Trump would have "taken it one step further" and included these countries.

I don't. I did not like Obama's rule by Executive Order and I don't like President Trump doing the same thing. We have a tripartite form of government for a reason. The Legislative Branch passes laws. The Executive Branch enforces those laws, and the Judicial Branch adjudicates those laws.

I don't disagree with the intent of the Executive Order to suspend immigration from the countries supporting or harboring terrorists while the methodology of vetting is reviewed and updated, but in a Constitutional Democratic Republic that law should have come from the Congress to be signed by the President.

 

[Use of Time]

Muslim? No.
Sympathetic to Muslims? Yes.

You can't help having empathy toward people you grew up with, and he grew up in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world.

He lived and went to school in Indonesia from the time he was 8 until he was 12. And those are very formative years.

Absolutely, but apparently he suspended sympathy in order to place the welfare of the nation that elected him. That decision was not implemented the same way Trump just did it though.

I'm not disagreeing with you as you acknowledged the problem in your post to ITL.

 

[InTheLight]

I don't. I did not like Obama's rule by Executive Order and I don't like President Trump doing the same thing. We have a tripartite form of government for a reason. The Legislative Branch passes laws. The Executive Branch enforces those laws, and the Judicial Branch adjudicates those laws.

I don't disagree with the intent of the Executive Order to suspend immigration from the countries supporting or harboring terrorists while the methodology of vetting is reviewed and updated, but in a Constitutional Democratic Republic that law should have come from the Congress to be signed by the President.

Agree that this should be a law that Congress passes and the President signs. However, it seems that executive orders are a way of governing nowadays, so if Trump is going to use them, he should have included these other countries as well.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I would add those nations to the list. I would not have called it a ban. I would have implemented enhanced requirements needed to immigrate, extreme vetting if you prefer, which would have amounted to a de facto ban. Then, yes, I would have been happy.

Surprised that Trump supporters are touting an Obama list of countries to defend Trump's flaccid attempt at keeping terrorists out.


Hopefully he will fix this thing and get it right.

Sent from my Moto Droid Turbo.

He will put his best man on it.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

From February 18, 2016 (when President Obama was in leadership)(my bolding added to highlight the 7 countries):



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

So in other word's, he is that incompetent that he has to follow BOs plan instead of devising his own? Is that what your telling me?

 

[annsni]

Since the ban does not include people from Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, United Arab Emigrates, and Pakistan it does not include those countries which pose the most risk of harming us. These are the countries of origin for the 9/11 terrorists and also the San Bernardino terrorists.

President Obama would apparently disagree with you as would the Department of Homeland Security who has intel on these things and know were the risk is from.

I wish Trump would have "taken it one step further" and included these countries. As it stands right now, it looks like it was a quick and easy way to keep a campaign promise and placate a bloc of voters.

I would disagree. I think the fact that President Obama felt that these countries were a risk for the US and President Trump agreed and took it one step further shows true concern for the safety of our nation.

 

[Revmitchell]

Since the ban does not include people from Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, United Arab Emigrates, and Pakistan it does not include those countries which pose the most risk of harming us.

Which shows you do not really understand what this so called "ban" is exactly. Probably should do more research before commenting again.

 

[InTheLight]

Which shows you do not really understand what this so called "ban" is exactly. Probably should do more research before commenting again.

This is what it is, according to the President of the United States:

It's not a Muslim ban. But it's countries that have tremendous terror. And it's countries that people are going to come in and cause us tremendous problems. Our country has enough problems without allowing people to come in who, in many cases or in some cases, are looking to do tremendous destruction.

I don't want terror in this country.
You look at what happened in San Bernardino. You look at what happened all over. You look at what happened in the World Trade Center.

We're not letting people in if we think there's even a little chance of some problem.

----------------

OK, so why not Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan? They are countries whose citizens HAVE attacked us.

If one of you would simply answer this question....And no, "because these are the countries that Obama picked out back in 2012" is not a valid answer. Trump campaigned on overturning Obama's executive orders.

 

[Revmitchell]

This is what it is, according to the President of the United States:

It's not a Muslim ban. But it's countries that have tremendous terror. And it's countries that people are going to come in and cause us tremendous problems. Our country has enough problems without allowing people to come in who, in many cases or in some cases, are looking to do tremendous destruction.

I don't want terror in this country.
You look at what happened in San Bernardino. You look at what happened all over. You look at what happened in the World Trade Center.

We're not letting people in if we think there's even a little chance of some problem.

----------------

OK, so why not Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan? They are countries whose citizens HAVE attacked us.

If one of you would simply answer this question....And no, "because these are the countries that Obama picked out back in 2012" is not a valid answer. Trump campaigned on overturning Obama's executive orders.

I am embarrassed for you. The so called "ban" is a temporary hold on people coming from war torn countries where vetting properly is virtually impossible.It is not that anyone does not want people from these countries coming in, it is that we want them coming in properly vetted. Trump wants an end to improperly vetted people coming from these countries where we know, for a fact, that people who are extremists are working their way into the crowd of people coming in from these countries. So he wants systems put in place to be able to do a proper vetting. Those coming from countries like Saudi Arabia do not have this problem.

The ban is only temporary until we can vett them with some integrity. Obama just opened the door and let them all in basically unvetted. Trump is fixing that.

 

[InTheLight]

I am embarrassed for you. The so called "ban" is a temporary hold on people coming from war torn countries where vetting properly is virtually impossible.It is not that anyone does not want people from these countries coming in, it is that we want them coming in properly vetted. Trump wants an end to improperly vetted people coming from these countries where we know, for a fact, that people who are extremists are working their way into the crowd of people coming in from these countries. So he wants systems put in place to be able to do a proper vetting. Those coming from countries like Saudi Arabia do not have this problem.

The ban is only temporary until we can vett them with some integrity. Obama just opened the door and let them all in basically unvetted. Trump is fixing that.

OK, so why not Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I would disagree. I think the fact that President Obama felt that these countries were a risk for the US and President Trump agreed and took it one step further shows true concern for the safety of our nation.

Right......at the peril of people who had their paperwork in order, Green Cards, waited years for entry etc. I see it as poor planning, poorly executed. When you shotgun initiatives, at least consult with other staff members (Mattis, Kelly etc) in order to develop a detailed commonsense plan that works. Bottom line, they at the least, inconvenienced .....more likely put these refugees in peril of loosing their lives. Great work team Trump, Bannon, Miller. And this is only your 1st week! What other adventures your cooking up that the American people can look forward to......A FUBAR Delight perhaps!?!

 

[Revmitchell]

Right......at the peril of people who had their paperwork in order, Green Cards, waited years for entry etc. I see it as poor planning, poorly executed. When you shotgun initiatives, at least consult with other staff members (Mattis, Kelly etc) in order to develop a detailed commonsense plan that works. Bottom line, they at the least, inconvenienced .....more likely put these refugees in peril of loosing their lives. Great work team Trump, Bannon, Miller. And this is only your 1st week! What other adventures your cooking up that the American people can look forward to......A FUBAR Delight perhaps!?!

They knew it would create these inconveniences for people already traveling but chose to do it anyone so as not to announce to the enemy what they were doing. I applaud that.

 

[Rolfe]

They knew it would create these inconveniences for people already traveling but chose to do it anyone so as not to announce to the enemy what they were doing. I applaud that.

Easy to applaud it when you are not the Legal Resident who cannot get home.

 

[InTheLight]

so as not to announce to the enemy what they were doing. I applaud that.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I wonder if this mess would have occurred if Senator Sessions had been confirmed in a more timely manner. To me, it would have given the President an AG who's advice he trusted.

 

[Yeshua1]

I wonder if this mess would have occurred if Senator Sessions had been confirmed in a more timely manner. To me, it would have given the President an AG who's advice he trusted.

the AG job is to enfore the decisions of the current president, and if you disagree, obligated to quit!

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I support Yate's firing. Better she should have just resigned. But, if Sessions had been AG, he might have been able to smooth off some of the rougher edges. And Trump would not have been so worried about his EO leaking.

the AG job is to enforce the decisions of the current president, and if you disagree, obligated to quit!

 

[annsni]

View attachment 1206

And at that point, the temporary ban was in place.

 

[annsni]

Easy to applaud it when you are not the Legal Resident who cannot get home.

Legal residents did get home.