Refugees/Citizens of Muslim Countries Barred

[Lilly]

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

Yes Ma'am ..

Good answer...LOL!

[Yamato]

4 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Oh, I just wanted to say something about the 'Refugee Entry Process'. The process certainly looks quite through and encompassing...but then I began to think of a computer. If you put incorrect information into a computer you will get the old 'garbage in, garbage out', we all know this. However, what if the information one is getting about refugee people (perhaps from their prior countries) is essentially 'garbage'? Maybe, the countries in question are not so much 'better' than certain other countries, but rather they simply do not offer very good information on refugee populations?

This is just a thought (a possible hypothesis if you will).

The refugees could simply lie about where they originally came from, that's a good point.  

Ahh the joys of micromanaging immigration policy because we refuse to acknowledge foreign policy.

[Lilly]

4 minutes ago, SNR said:

 

Are they planning WW3?

Oh, *Beep* I really hope not.

[Jarocal]

8 minutes ago, SNR said:

There's only a difference to those who believe all men aren't equal. In the west we are persuaded to accept other faiths but it's blatantly obvious to those of us who aren't bought by the lies that Islam throughout the Middle East has no tolerance for other religions especially Christianity.

 

All people are not created equal. Some are born into societies such as in Europe and the US where while there are inequities there is a quality of life they will enjoy not seen in other Sovereign countries.

 Are you advocating an Imperial takeover of such countries and forcing a cultural change on populations who may not be willing to accept such?

Or are you proposing North Korea type isolation for so many countries that they would be able to form their own UN/NATO style alliance stopping any cultural influence the West may have on them. Not to mention further and China would be more than willing to expand their sphere of influence further  into those countries.

[Clarakore]

Quote

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) on Sunday said President Trump's sweeping executive order barring refugees and people from seven majority-Muslim nations did not go through the necessary vetting process.

"It was not properly vetted. So you have an extreme vetting proposal that didn't get the vetting it should have had," Portman said on CNN's "State of the Union."

http://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/316739-portman-trumps-order-not-properly-vetted

Even Republicans are not buying it.

Edited January 29, 2017 by Avatar Samantha Ai

[Lilly]

4 minutes ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

http://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/316739-portman-trumps-order-not-properly-vetted

Even Republicans are not buying it.

Senator Rob Portman was (is?) one of the 'Never Trump' Republicans. So, this isn't surprising really.

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

3 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

All people are not created equal. Some are born into societies such as in Europe and the US where while there are inequities there is a quality of life they will enjoy not seen in other Sovereign countries.

 Are you advocating an Imperial takeover of such countries and forcing a cultural change on populations who may not be willing to accept such?

Or are you proposing North Korea type isolation for so many countries that they would be able to form their own UN/NATO style alliance stopping any cultural influence the West may have on them. Not to mention further and China would be more than willing to expand their sphere of influence further  into those countries.

Neither. I'm stating a fact.

its not ok to ban a religious person or temple in UK or America where we not just tolerate but encourage it but it is ok for another religion or religious country to ban our places of worship. Christians are just about tolerated but not welcomed.. And increasing numbers are being slaughtered.

And yes I forgot, throughout the Asia and Africa women are not equal.. You're right about that!

[Clarakore]

 

Quote

Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/29/heres-where-republicans-stand-on-president-trumps-controversial-travel-ban/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_fix-count-1209pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.1c360d0cdb54

10 Republicans go on record against Trump's executive order.

13 more Republicans with deep reservations.

[Jarocal]

6 minutes ago, SNR said:

Neither. I'm stating a fact.

its not ok to ban a religious person or temple in UK or America where we not just tolerate but encourage it but it is ok for another religion or religious country to ban our places of worship. Christians are just about tolerated but not welcomed.. And increasing numbers are being slaughtered.

And yes I forgot, throughout the Asia and Africa women are not equal.. You're right about that!

So what is your proposed solution to enhance the equality in those countries? Or are you advocating a reverse discrimination on western society's part which only further enshrines their beliefs that such discrimination is ok?

I don't have an answer other than I do not want to see rights for citizens in the US diminished, but rather citizens liberties expanded even with the associated personal risks involved.

[Yamato]

1 minute ago, Jarocal said:

All people are not created equal. Some are born into societies such as in Europe and the US where while there are inequities there is a quality of life they will enjoy not seen in other Sovereign countries.

 Are you advocating an Imperial takeover of such countries and forcing a cultural change on populations who may not be willing to accept such?

Or are you proposing North Korea type isolation for so many countries that they would be able to form their own UN/NATO style alliance stopping any cultural influence the West may have on them. Not to mention further and China would be more than willing to expand their sphere of influence further  into those countries.

Those are good questions so what do we do?  

I'll advocate that anyone who wants to go fight the war against Muslim countries should just drop their keyboard warrior'ing, and go fight it personally themselves.   Why not, right?   Nothing's stopping us.   Go, fight for the moderates in Syria, or against whoever one's been made to believe is their "enemy."   

Why do we need cultural influence over Chinese people?    What does the South China Sea have to do with our liberty?   Will we have to pay higher prices from Taiwan Semiconductor and Hyundai?  

If influence is the revenue, more trade and smarter diplomacy are the sales.   It appears we'll have less trade and diplomacy so silly little war games bureaucrats play may become the primary medium of exchange.   China is virtually invulnerable militarily from the outside so we'll probably be looking at ways to hurt them internally if that's what we're interested in.  Ergo, stopping their influence.   Fighting back against China's free market economics with DT's fascist bandaids is a bit like Floyd Mayweather walking into an MMA fight against Conor McGregor.

[Clarakore]

Quote

I know that former senior commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan are very concerned about this order and what the impact it will have on those that helped us in Iraq and Afghanistan, the interpreters, translators and so on, who were promised safe haven in the United States and now may not get it,” former Defense Secretary Bob Gates, who served under both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, said on ABC “This Week” Sunday.

“I spoke as recently as last night with Gen. [David] Petraeus, and he and others, like Gen. [Peter] Chiarelli, are very concerned about this,” Gates added. “So I think one thing the administration ought to do is clarify this as quickly as possible.”

Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) was also worried about what Trump’s order could do to the work of U.S. forces during an interview on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday. Moulton served four tours in Iraq as a member of the Marine Corps and helped his translator get asylum in the United States.

“It’s fundamentally un-American and it’s also making America less safe,” Moulton said. “And that’s something that Americans need to understand today, is that what Trump is doing is harming our national security. It will incite attacks against us. ISIS is already using this ban as propaganda. And it will prevent us from being able to get the allies that are so critical in our war against terror.”

“There’s nothing in his executive order that improves the vetting process,” he added. “He’s just putting across a blanket ban that will be used against us. And I know personally how important it is to be able to rely on these allies overseas. I know how ISIS can use our words against us. And what Trump is doing will make the fight against terror more difficult.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/troops-donald-trump-immigration_us_588e114be4b0b065cbbc9573?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

[Jarocal]

17 minutes ago, Yamato said:

Those are good questions so what do we do?  

 

I live my simple life and pester my elected officials to expand personal liberties, limit federal powers putting them back into states hands, and annoy my towship supervisor's by asking pointed questions about proposals .

Questions that I feel the local news reporters sent there in case anything "newsworthy" occurs should be asking if they were actual journalists and not just lazily fishing for usable soundbytes...

[Clarakore]

Quote

Attorneys general from 16 U.S. states, including California, New York and Pennsylvania, issued a joint statement on Sunday condemning President Donald Trump's executive order restricting immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-states-idUSKBN15D11X

[Claire.]

Just checking out Canadian news and this is what their Prime Minister tweeted after Trump's executive order was issued:

Edited January 29, 2017 by Claire.
Removed white space.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

3 minutes ago, Claire. said:

Just checking out Canadian news and this is what their Prime Minister tweeted after Trump's executive order was issued:

 

If Nustin keeps that up, Canada will be added to the list of No Entry Countries.

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

56 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

So what is your proposed solution to enhance the equality in those countries? Or are you advocating a reverse discrimination on western society's part which only further enshrines their beliefs that such discrimination is ok?

I don't have an answer other than I do not want to see rights for citizens in the US diminished, but rather citizens liberties expanded even with the associated personal risks involved.

I don't have a solution. But try not to forget that the civilised west has been trying to influence these countries/peoples for hundreds and hundreds of years. They don't mind taking the technology in all forms from health care to arms, but women are not worthy and neither is our way of life. 

You'd have thought by now these people would evolve like the rest of us?

What rights does a Christian have in Saudi Arabia since you like asking questions.. I know America and the UK have equal rights for all races, sexes and religions.

sorry, didn't format it properly 

Edited January 29, 2017 by SNR
To add last line

[Claire.]

Just now, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

If Nustin keeps that up, Canada will be added to the list of No Entry Countries.

Apparently there was some confusion about what the executive order meant for Canadians with dual citizenship as many have citizenship with Muslim-majority countries on Trump's list. But they are okay as long as they travel with their Canadian passports. But yeah, Canada has long been viewed as a way in for terrorists, and I'm not sure how Trump might deal with that given Canada's openness to refugees from Syria and other places.

[Clarakore]

Quote

Trump immigration order restricted by more U.S. judges

U.S. judges in at least four states blocked federal authorities from enforcing President Donald Trump's executive order restricting immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15D0XG

[Farmer77]

2 minutes ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15D0XG

Thanks for the articles. I think this quote from the article above highlights the inanity of all of this :

The new Republican president said these actions were needed "to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States."

Yet the nation who supplied the hijackers on 9/11 isnt included in the ban. 

[Likely Guy]

28 minutes ago, Claire. said:

Apparently there was some confusion about what the executive order meant for Canadians with dual citizenship as many have citizenship with Muslim-majority countries on Trump's list. But they are okay as long as they travel with their Canadian passports. But yeah, Canada has long been viewed as a way in for terrorists, and I'm not sure how Trump might deal with that given Canada's openness to refugees from Syria and other places.

Re: the bolded part

As near as I can recollect only one terrorist, the failed "shoe bomber", came to the US via Canada.

[Jarocal]

9 minutes ago, SNR said:

I don't have a solution. But try not to forget that the civilised west has been trying to influence these countries/peoples for hundreds and hundreds of years. They don't mind taking the technology in all forms from health care to arms, but women are not worthy and neither is our way of life. 

You'd have thought by now these people would evolve like the rest of us?

What rights does a Christian have in Saudi Arabia since you like asking questions.. I know America and the UK have equal rights for all races, sexes and religions.

sorry, didn't format it properly 

While the west has been trying to influence many of those areas for centuries, the idea of equality for all is a rather recent achievement even in the west. It has not been that long since women and blacks were prohibited from voting in the US let alone the servant caste lifestyle peasants in those countries were accustomed to under colonialism.

With partitioning and the end of the colonial era many of those countries regressed even further under authoritarian measures by governments who initially may have truly been merely trying to provide stability. Other than our toys and gadgets the populations in many countries have never had rights or the ability to fight for them as the democratic west and Russia/China have made sure authoritarian regimes and insurgencies stay armed better than the populace via our proxy battles.

Why would anyone think those areas would rapidly evolve when all they have known since colonialism is strife?

I honestly do not know what rights Christians have in Saudi Arabia. I just find it funny that the treatment of women and Christians in Saudi Arabia( and other Islamic countries) is common ground both the left and right agree on yet both sides are too stubborn to coalesce on the issue to pressure meaningful change. 

[Jarocal]

15 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Thanks for the articles. I think this quote from the article above highlights the inanity of all of this :

The new Republican president said these actions were needed "to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States."

Yet the nation who supplied the hijackers on 9/11 isnt included in the ban. 

We went over this pages ago, it is not a secret, the US economy likes their oil. Repetition of the statement should not increase anyones surprise. If anything it strains credulity that anyone with a modicum of logic would entertain the notion any administration would overtly strain our relations with the House of Saud...

[Farmer77]

3 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

We went over this pages ago, it is not a secret, the US economy likes their oil. Repetition of the statement should not increase anyones surprise. If anything it strains credulity that anyone with a modicum of logic would entertain the notion any administration would overtly strain our relations with the House of Saud...

Oh I know the status quo but I just cant live in that paradigm anymore man. Ill stand by my previous post that it is inane to ban people from nations that have never sent us a terrorist yet Saudis are good to go. 

[skliss]

4 hours ago, bee said:

.

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 -

 

the post you quoted was by someone who said he didn't care. I was answering both of you. And I've seen many things said about him...very little of them were true but it goes to show how if something is said long enough people believe it. Like saying repeatedly that a man with degrees from BOTH Yale and Harvard is "dumb".

[Jarocal]

11 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Oh I know the status quo but I just cant live in that paradigm anymore man. Ill stand by my previous post that it is inane to ban people from nations that have never sent us a terrorist yet Saudis are good to go. 

Until such time as the world economy is weaned from cheap petroleum energy and plastics, or Middle Eastern wells dry up completely, you will not see such a paradigm shift. Alternative fuel and plastic sources are great to research but matching petroleum's bang for the buck with it's established infrastructure globally is going to require a radical shift in how we view energy.