Refugees/Citizens of Muslim Countries Barred

[Farmer77]

Just now, Lilly said:

Like I said before, perhaps all this is being done for some purpose verses Trump just being a 'screw up'?

I totally agree it is actually. I just hope those purposes actually benefit the average American. 

[Jarocal]

13 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

It doesnt take a foreign policy expert to point out the obvious issues with Trumps actions here. ...which fits i suppose since he isnt exactly a foreign policy expert 

Considering the "foreign policy experts" administrations have listened to for the last 50 years have tty much caused this mess, perhaps a currently credentialed foreign policy expert is not what should be the guiding forve on our policies. That is not to say they should be completely ignored, but regardless one's opibion of Trump, the current foreign policy situation is not Trumps doing.

The issue I had with the respective exec order was the deportations which has been addressed through the courts.

[Lilly]

2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I totally agree it is actually. I just hope those purposes actually benefit the average American. 

Now that's the correct question to be asking.

I must admit though, all this is pretty nerve wrecking...the winds of change are blowing with hurricane force it seems.

Edited January 29, 2017 by Lilly
typo

[skliss]

10 hours ago, F3SS said:

So that's why we have checks and balances. To dot the I's and cross the T's that are sometimes overlooked and now maybe our green card holders won't be as put out.

One of the biggest illegal immigration issues we have in this country are those that come in on a limited basis via a green card and blatantly overstay. We have been very lax about tracking them down up until now. I have no objection to them taking a harder line and making sure they leave when their visas are up.

[skliss]

5 hours ago, bee said:

.

re bolded - he was probably on medication .... prozac or something similar  (I'm not joking)

I don't think we are definitely f......ed - although there may be a very rocky road ahead especially
with the Globalists creating such havoc, indoctrinating people with MSM, Face Book Twitter etc -

.

 

Neither of those is correct. One thing the media never reported was how often GWBush visited veterans hospitals, with no fanfare, just to show his respect for those who fought for us. He does massive amounts of charity work for wounded soldiers now that he isnt in office so to spout that he didn't care is just wrong. He was acting Presidential.

[Farmer77]

27 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

The issue I had with the respective exec order was the deportations which has been addressed through the courts.

I had an issue with the deportations and am glad to see the checks and balances working. In general though I find the whole memo intellectually insulting and kind of a continuation of the last 16 years worth of foreign policy. 

Edited January 29, 2017 by Farmer77

[skliss]

12 hours ago, Michelle said:

It was one of their accomplices. This article is about his actual wife. I doubt you will read it either.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/06/us/san-bernardino-shooter-tashfeen-malik/

Everyone should be vetted if they want to become of citizen of the US. People do background checks on potential employees and they aren't vilified. Rent an apartment or house...background check. People who have massive, violent, criminal records or questionable associates should not slip through the cracks for any reason.

I had to have a fingerprint background check in order  to volunteer at my kids school.

[Jarocal]

Just now, Farmer77 said:

I had an issue with the deportations and am glad to see the checks and balances working. In general though I find it intellectually insulting and kind of a continuation of the last 16 years worth of foreign policy. 

Where I differ from your opinion is I feel the continuation is longer than from the last two administrations. Too abrupt of a reversal in policy or rapid a disengagement from the region would prove as catastrophic as blind continuation has been. While disruptive to the status quo, the temporary ban does effectively convey to all countries in the region that the US is reexamining it's role in the area. While certain countries who have been longstanding allies of the US in the region were not included in the current order, they undoubtedly are viewing such an order as a clear indication Trump is willing to radically alter policy.

 

 What I find completely ironic is making posts in a polotical thread which could be construed as me being a supporter of a president I did not vote for and think was equally poor of a choice as Hillary who would habe been an endorsement of the status quo and the failed policies that have America where it is now.

[Farmer77]

Just now, Jarocal said:

Where I differ from your opinion is I feel the continuation is longer than from the last two administrations. Too abrupt of a reversal in policy or rapid a disengagement from the region would prove as catastrophic as blind continuation has been. While disruptive to the status quo, the temporary ban does effectively convey to all countries in the region that the US is reexamining it's role in the area. While certain countries who have been longstanding allies of the US in the region were not included in the current order, they undoubtedly are viewing such an order as a clear indication Trump is willing to radically alter policy.

 

 What I find completely ironic is making posts in a polotical thread which could be construed as me being a supporter of a president I did not vote for and think was equally poor of a choice as Hillary who would habe been an endorsement of the status quo and the failed policies that have America where it is now.

I like your perspective, im not holding as much optimism im afraid. I think this could just as easily be interpreted as a message to the world that yeah its a different administration but big picture things will stay the same. 

[EllJay]

14 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Now that's the correct question to be asking.

I must admit though, all this is pretty nerve wrecking...the winds of change are blowing with hurricane force it seems.

1989 the winds of change blew down one actual wall - and hundreds of figurative ones.

28 years later the winds of change blows back in the opposite direction, and erects yet another wall - followed by hundreds of figurative ones.

 

 

 

[Lilly]

Well, the Berlin Wall kept people from leaving a country. A US Border Wall will keep people from entering a country. There is a difference there.

[Jarocal]

2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I like your perspective, im not holding as much optimism im afraid. I think this could just as easily be interpreted as a message to the world that yeah its a different administration but big picture things will stay the same. 

I hold optimism because I live in America and while not blind to it's flaws do see it as the land of opportunity for all. I live in a predominately white rural area where the nearest store in a 7 mile radius is owned by a young Indian man who worked his whole life saving to acquire the collateral to get the loan to buy a business he spends 80+ hrs per week at employing a dozen local people. I'm friends with an amish guy who pulled a wagon of produce in a 4 mile trip every other day selling in season produce as a kid (I used to buy from him) reinvesting part of those earnings back into his operation until he leased a market stand and then purchased acreage to start other endeavours. I taught a young kid how to graft fruit trees (a hobby for me) and he turned it into an incone larger than working full time at a fast food joint while still in high school.

 It is far too easy to focus on the inevitable inequities which will exist and try to protest against them rather than finding a positive experience and using that to try and spread hope to someone in regard to their future while pressing elected officials to expand personal liberties.

[Farmer77]

15 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Well, the Berlin Wall kept people from leaving a country. A US Border Wall will keep people from entering a country. There is a difference there.

My largest concern about the wall is giving the government the tools of tyranny. Despite the hyperbole im not saying Trump is or will become a tyrant but if he or any other leader in the future were to , that wall will come in awfully handy to their purposes. 

I do realize the minuscule odds of that happening but we have a second amendment for that very reason so that kind of forward thinking isnt unprecedented 

Edited January 29, 2017 by Farmer77

[F3SS]

10 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

My largest concern about the wall is giving the government the tools of tyranny. Despite the hyperbole im not saying Trump is or will become a tyrant but if he or any other leader in the future were to , that wall will come in awfully handy to their purposes. 

I do realize the minuscule odds of that happening but we have a second amendment for that very reason so that kind of forward thinking isnt unprecedented 

It's going to have to be pretty bad for hoards of Americans to try and flood the Mexican borders lol

[toast]

17 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Well, the Berlin Wall kept people from leaving a country. A US Border Wall will keep people from entering a country. There is a difference there.

BTW: In the terms of the GDR (German Democratic Republic) government the wall was called Anti-Fascist Protective Barrier with the purpose to keep the "fascists" out of the country.

[Jarocal]

Just now, Farmer77 said:

My largest concern about the wall is giving the government the tools of tyranny. Despite the hyperbole im not saying Trump is or will become a tyrant but if he or any other leader in the future were to , that wall will come in awfully handy to their purposes. 

I do realize the minuscule odds of that happening but we have a second amendment for that very reason so forward thinking isnt necessarily a bad idea. 

My perpective is that the Berlin wall served a purpose at a time it was needed. When that need no longer existed it came down. Not that I think a wall along the Mexican border is a necessity.

 How many Americans descrying the Trump wall own property with a fence? That fence does not necessarily mean "no entry" merely "visitors please use the gate".

Foreign policy exploiting workers to our South have exacerbated the situation to the point it is viewed as more beneficial to some in illegally migrating to the US where being exploited as low wage labor here still provides a better opportunity to elevate their family's economic position in their country of origin.

Reforming policies in trade and a more open immigration policy leading to an elevation of there economies would do more for border security than a wall (imho).

[GlitterRose]

4 hours ago, Claire. said:

Interesting recent report on Muslim-American Involvement with violent extremism. Bottom-line, since 9/11, no one has been killed here in a terrorist attack by anyone who emigrated from or whose parents emigrated from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. And as that report states, of Muslim Americans involved in violent extremism of any kind (such as  plotting terrorism or supporting a terrorist group) only 23 percent had family backgrounds in those countries.

Stats sourced from the report and The New York Times

Also from that same NYT article:

There was a random quality to the list of countries: It excluded Saudi Arabia and Egypt, where the founders of Al Qaeda and many other jihadist groups have originated. Also excluded are Pakistan and Afghanistan, where persistent extremism and decades of war have produced militants who have occasionally reached the United States. Notably, perhaps, the list avoided Muslim countries where Mr. Trump has major business ventures.
Continue reading the main story

Nor did the list include the European countries where disenfranchised Muslim communities have become hotbeds of militancy, leading to major attacks in Paris and Brussels in the name of the Islamic State. Because no visas are required for travel by most European citizens to the United States, and because of the volume of tourism and business, restricting travel from Europe would have been far more difficult and consequential than banning it from only the seven countries named.

So um yeah, the ban will do little by way of making us safer. And even if it is temporary, there is little they can do within that short period of time to make the already stringent vetting process any better, because the improvement it needs (i.e., more comprehensive intelligence gathering and sharing for database purposes) is an iterative process.

It was never about actually making us safer. It was about making a particular group..,his base...feel like he had done what he said he was gonna do. 

[bee]

1 hour ago, skliss said:

Neither of those is correct. One thing the media never reported was how often GWBush visited veterans hospitals, with no fanfare, just to show his respect for those who fought for us. He does massive amounts of charity work for wounded soldiers now that he isnt in office so to spout that he didn't care is just wrong. He was acting Presidential.

.

I didn't say he didn't care - and I'm not going to put a link here but a search for 'George W Bush  ant-depressants' brings
up some results -

 

[Just_Seeking]

He should have gave the immigrants a 30 day grace period for all to figure out what they needed to do so no one would get illegally detained.

I believe  this is a moderate solution no blood should be spilled period, but definitely not on American soil by terrorist. 

[toast]

10 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

My perpective is that the Berlin wall served a purpose at a time it was needed.

The Berlin Wall was just a small section of the 1400km long border that separated East Germany from West Germany. The whole border was equipped with electric fences, anti-personnel mines, spring-guns and the border officials had the order to fire on every person who tried to pass the border. If you think that border had a need it must be made very clear that the needs where just to fullfil the requirements of a socialist-fascist regime.

Quote

When that need no longer existed it came down.

It wasnt downed because of a no longer need, it was downed because of a beginning revolution in East Germany and other East europaen states and by the smart action of 2 smart statesmen, Ronald and Michail.

[Jarocal]

10 minutes ago, toast said:

The Berlin Wall was just a small section of the 1400km long border that separated East Germany from West Germany. The whole border was equipped with electric fences, anti-personnel mines, spring-guns and the border officials had the order to fire on every person who tried to pass the border. If you think that border had a need it must be made very clear that the needs where just to fullfil the requirements of a socialist-fascist regime.

It wasnt downed because of a no longer need, it was downed because of a beginning revolution in East Germany and other East europaen states and by the smart action of 2 smart statesmen, Ronald and Michail.

The need was the Socialist goverments requirement for tight control. The East German political revolution removed that need.

I've already stated I do not think a wall with Mexico will be of substantive help with illegal immigration. Mexico has one in place with Guatemala and the only thing it has done is to make the Cartels richer ferrying illegal immigrants a longer distance.

[Uncle Sam]

As for refugees, I rather bring in the right type of refugees instead of those who have ill-intent towards our nation. Why bring a fox into a chicken house because the fox pretends to be chicken? That is really what it is about. 4 month ban on refugees entering our nation so we can fix up a better vetting system to make sure we don't bring in foxes into our chicken house is so much reasonable compared to leaving the gate open without oversight.

As for people complaining about the border wall that needs to be built, this is another issue of security for our nation. By funneling any immigration into choke points or checkpoints, we can better control the flow of immigration into United States and ensure that get immigrants who suited to be part of our nation. I just want legit immigration, where they incorporate themselves into Americas culture instead of forming little pockets of their community and demand we abide by their rules. This is a different nation, with a different set of rules that must be respected and followed until such rules are written out of the law. This goes for the natural citizens of this nation, we have to follow all the rules and laws that are in place or we can face a very stiff punishment. Who really wants a immigrant that ignores our culture, creates a limit mexico pocket in our border, spits on United States flag while waving mexican flag, and while leaching money from the United States economy while benefiting only Mexico alone. Mexico makes 24.4 billion dollars per year from Mexican citizens sending U.S. dollars across the border, money that Americans will never see again, that is the second largest income for Mexico and you see why they are so set against any border security... they would loose their cash cow in the process.

Edited January 29, 2017 by Uncle Sam

[Lilly]

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

Look at the date and the countries flagged.

Quote

February 18, 2016

For Immediate Release
DHS Press Office
Contact: 202-282-8010

WASHINGTON—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. 

......The three additional countries designated today join Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Syria as countries subject to restrictions for Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals. *bolding added*

Edited January 29, 2017 by Lilly
bolding added

[Farmer77]

1 minute ago, Uncle Sam said:

 As for refugees, I rather bring in the right type of refugees instead of those who have ill-intent towards our nation. Why bring a fox into a chicken house because the fox pretends to be chicken? That is really what it is about. 4 month ban on refugees entering our nation so we can fix up a better vetting system to make sure we don't bring in foxes into our chicken house is so much better.

So  what is Trump going to add to the current vetting system to make it better? 

[Uncle Sam]

4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

So  what is Trump going to add to the current vetting system to make it better? 

The vetting system flags any suspicious individuals who has ties with terrorists, it adds a list of all known terrorists (Obama did away with this list), updates the visa requirements, updates the green card requirements, and any individuals from any nation with a background of violent offenses shall be barred from entering United States. Pretty much he is making a extensive list of individuals who pose a threat to U.S. citizens with the corporation of Nations around the globe and it doesn't just single out Islamic terrorists for that matter, it focus on all individuals from all countries.