Refugees/Citizens of Muslim Countries Barred

[aztek]

8 minutes ago, skyeagle409 said:

 

Trump's travel ban wouldn't have stopped these deadly terrorists

coming from clinton news network, lol

may be they even right it would not, but we know for a fact whatever obama\bush  did for domestic security did not work either, e lets see where trump's approach gets us.

Edited January 30, 2017 by aztek

[Clarakore]

3 hours ago, simplybill said:

This article from CNN, following the Nairobi Mall Attack, are the people that "extreme vetting" is meant to weed out:

"Faarax told the group that he had "experienced true brotherhood" while fighting in Somalia and that "jihad would be fun" and they would "get to shoot guns," according to the U.S. Justice Department. 

That meeting resulted in seven men traveling from Minnesota to Somalia to fight for Al-Shabaab in late 2007.

One was Shirwa Ahmed, a 26-year-old naturalized American citizen. Ahmed became the first American to conduct a suicide attack when he drove a truck loaded with explosives toward a government compound in Puntland, northern Somalia, blowing himself up and killing 20 other people in October 29, 2008. He is buried in a cemetery in Burnsville, a suburb of Minneapolis."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/23/opinion/bergen-al-shabaab-american-ties/index.html

 

 

Are you saying  Kenya should not allow Americans or that America should not allow Americans? What?

[simplybill]

1 minute ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

Are you saying  Kenya should not allow Americans or that America should not allow Americans? What?

My aim wasn't to specifically name Kenya as a source of all radical influences. I was giving an example of how importing the wrong people can lead to the radicalization of American citizens and recent immigrants.  If the vetting process helps weed out the radical teachers, imams and students, then there is less of a chance that non-radicalized military-age men and women will be recruited here in the U.S. 

[docyabut2]

19 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Doccy

 

That is a horrible thing to say about a little girl who was shot in the head for standing up for the rights of children to receive education against the will of ISIS. 

 

That is downright horrible of you. Honestly, how can you say that about a little girl who went through what she did for basic rights? 

 

Her family also runs a chain of schools in the region, despite the very real death threats from ISIS which as Malala can attest, are indeed very real. 

 

LINK - Malala Yousafzai

Malala Yousafzai (S.St) (Malālah Yūsafzay: Urdu: ملالہ یوسفزئی‎; Pashto: ملاله یوسفزۍ‎ [məˈlaːlə jusəf ˈzəj];[1] born 12 July 1997)[1][2] is a Pakistani activist for female education and the youngest-ever Nobel Prize laureate.[3] She is known mainly for human rights advocacy for education and for women in her native Swat Valley in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of northwest Pakistan, where the local Taliban had at times banned girls from attending school. Malala's advocacy has since grown into an international movement.

On the afternoon of 9 October 2012, Malala boarded her school bus in the northwest Pakistani district of Swat. A gunman asked for her by name, then pointed a pistol at her and fired three shots. One bullet hit the left side of Malala's forehead, travelled under her skin through the length of her face, and went into her shoulder.[4] In the days immediately following the attack, she remained unconscious and in critical condition, but later her condition improved enough for her to be sent to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham, England, for intensive rehabilitation. On 12 October, a group of 50 Muslim clerics in Pakistan issued a fatwā against those who tried to kill her, but the Taliban reiterated their intent to kill Malala and her father, Ziauddin Yousafzai.

 

Doccy - she is one of the good guys. 

 

on sorry did`nt know it was that little girl  I thought you were talking about a women terrorist that's supports isis  

Edited January 30, 2017 by docyabut2

[docyabut2]

Quote

 

Well any how Trump is doing a good job to protect our country. and its not only Muslims but those that support ISIS

Edited January 30, 2017 by docyabut2

[aztek]

left loved polls during elections, here is some more.

 

Poll: Do you support President Trump's travel ban on seven countries?

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2017/01/poll_do_you_support_president_trumps_travel_ban_on.html

Thank you for voting!

Yes 82.53%  (3,179 votes) 

 

 

No 17.47%  (673 votes) 

 

 

 

Total Votes: 3,852

p

Edited January 30, 2017 by aztek

[aztek]

poll from fox news is a bit different

Thank you for voting!

No 53.83%  (1,341 votes) 

 

 

Yes 46.17%  (1,150 votes) 

 

 

 

Total Votes: 2,491

Return To PollCreate Your Own Poll 

[aztek]

Most Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist Havens

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/january_2017/most_support_temporary_ban_on_newcomers_from_terrorist_havensMost Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist HavensMost Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist HavensView image on Twit

[aztek]

 

 

[Farmer77]

Just now, aztek said:

Most Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist Havens

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/january_2017/most_support_temporary_ban_on_newcomers_from_terrorist_havensMost Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist HavensMost Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist HavensView image on Twit

Yikes one of the nuggets in there was that 52% of Americans polled dont think the gov focuses enough on terrorism.....are you freaking kidding me? 

[aztek]

2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Yikes one of the nuggets in there was that 52% of Americans polled dont think the gov focuses enough on terrorism.....are you freaking kidding me? 

lol, yea but i have a feeling they meant obama gov. cuz this one blows up teh news all over the world with his antiterror measures

[Myles]

It is similar to what Obama did, but on a larger scale. Which, I think we all knew Trump was going to be like as far as immigration and restrictions went. So, Trump being more stringent with a very similar type of executive order, shouldn't really surprise anyone. 



It's to demonstrate that these were the countries that our administration, that just left office 8 days ago. Thought were the countries that represented the most danger. As to demonstrate that Donald Trump didn't just hand pick countries, based on the businesses he has in the others. Which yourself and others have suggested he did. 

 

[docyabut2]

Quote

I think Trump`s ban is great .and hope it not to late in  leaving  these  supporters of isis into our country that are already here.

 

[Jarocal]

17 minutes ago, Myles said:

It is similar to what Obama did, but on a larger scale. Which, I think we all knew Trump was going to be like as far as immigration and restrictions went. So, Trump being more stringent with a very similar type of executive order, shouldn't really surprise anyone. 



It's to demonstrate that these were the countries that our administration, that just left office 8 days ago. Thought were the countries that represented the most danger. As to demonstrate that Donald Trump didn't just hand pick countries, based on the businesses he has in the others. Which yourself and others have suggested he did. 

 

Maybe they were suggesting Trump should have been doing business for the last 8 years in the countries that the previous administration considered the most serious threat. 

[psyche101]

10 hours ago, SNR said:

Well at least they don't go round chopping ******* heads off.

Because you say so I have to buy that do I?

I'm beginning to realise where some of these tales start. They start on forums like this and before you know it, it's a headline story on CNN. Enough said 

Mate, they do go around chopping peoples heads of, you just do not get that in the media as much. You have heard about Bosnian Christians being targeted surely? Odas, a member here has horrifying tales to share of that occupation.

Or Africa?

LINK - Christian militias take bloody revenge on Muslims in Central African Republic

Christian militias freely admit that theirs is an exercise in vengeance, an eye for an eye, and they will not stop until they have "cleaned" the country of Muslims. 

What the real problem is there are many Muslim people in the same boat we are, they are persecuted by fundamentals, and stereotyping just creates people like Erika Menendez. I just do not see that as "a way forward". 

[Paranormal Panther]

20 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I would agree Frank, the greatest concern here is that this will just create more fundamentalists. If the good people are treated like bad people, it seems highly likely they will go what the hay, and join them. Seems to be creating a state of "if you cant beat em join em".  If that happens thing will only get worse. France taking a hardline did not seem to benefit them. 

That's a fair point. It's also how many conservatives and/or Republicans feel when insane leftists call them Nazis. Good people don't adopt the philosophy of "join them", though. If they do, they cease to be good.

[aztek]

 

[Sakari]

23 hours ago, Claire. said:

It is indeed shameful, because the TRUTH of it is that not all Muslims call for the death of non-believers and many Muslims in Syria are suffering just as many Christians are. We must not lose site of that. As for Christians, some of them can indeed be real jerks too. Christian aid groups in places like Sudan are known to refuse meals unless the person in need of them recites a Christian prayer. So tell me, what's a hungry Muslim to do in that situation?

Truth is:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to claim that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families.  The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries.  In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did).  Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous - the actual Arabic words for persecution (idtihad) - and oppression (a variation of "z-l-m") do not appear in the verse.  The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation.  This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

I believe there are about 106 more versus to go on this, but that is sufficient......So, ya, all Muslims believe this. Don't let the PC world fool you.

There is a big difference in being a real jerk and sawing someones head off, or flying planes with passengers into buildings, or throwing gay people off of buildings, or cutting arms off, etc,etc,etc......Sorry, they are barbaric. That is black and white.

Edited January 31, 2017 by Sakari

[psyche101]

7 hours ago, SNR said:

Well I'm proud to be an infidel/non believer and I'll chuck in deplorable because I can and I am

I think this is where we are going wrong, and being manipulated though. Let's face it, this is not ideologies, this is religion. People are not being categorised on their ideology, they are being categorised on their religion. The blanket term "Muslim" is being used, not radical Muslim, not politics. This is what will make more radical Muslims. If Muslim people treated all Christians like the ones in Africa beheading people, then wouldn't you expect Christians to throw their hands in the air and say, "well nothing is good enough might as well be what they say we are". The genuine refugees are the ones caught in the middle here. 

[Paranormal Panther]

9 hours ago, Lilly said:

But that number of Christian refugees did not all come from the war zone of Iraq and Syria. Christians compromise about 10% of the population in Iraq and Syria but only 1% have been given asylum elsewhere. The Pope (a couple of years ago) referred to what's happening to Christians in Iraq and Syria as being essentially genocide.

We have yet to hear what the Hollywood humanists think. I have yet to see one example of virtue-signaling on this genocide.

[psyche101]

47 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

That's a fair point. It's also how many conservatives and/or Republicans feel when insane leftists call them Nazis. Good people don't adopt the philosophy of "join them", though. If they do, they cease to be good.

Like with all the fundamental whackos, as offensive as they are, if they have free speech, and use it, we also know where the problematic groups are at, and what they are thinking. Better to keep an eye on them methinks. 

People can give up though. Its how radicalisation works, they target troubled youth, Radical Islam has no moral ground. They are just predators. When in hard times, people can grab at any straw out of desperation. Radical Islam has to rely on easy targets, because the actions defy logic and common sense. 

[Paranormal Panther]

9 hours ago, aztek said:

trump's order has nothing to do with religion, even Christians, or Jews coming from those countries would be treated the same

Shhhh! You're destroying the false narrative.

[psyche101]

3 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

on sorry did`nt know it was that little girl  I thought you were talking about a women terrorist that's supports isis  

Glad we could clear that up  

[psyche101]

7 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

Shhhh! You're destroying the false narrative.

That is not what Trump seems to be saying though:

LINK - Trump says US will prioritize Christian refugees

He refers to Christians in Syria, one of the 7 countries, so he is outright stating that he will use religion as an indicator of status. It seems very much by what he is saying that religion does play a part of this, and it will offer bias. 

[psyche101]

LINK - US travel ban: Why these seven countries?

Significant recent attacks in the US were not committed by citizens from any of the seven countries included in the order. This list includes:

• Fort Lauderdale airport shooting (January 2017): A US citizen
• Orlando nightclub shooting (June 2016): A US citizen with Afghan parents
• San Bernardino shooting (December 2015): A US citizen with Pakistani parents, and a Pakistani citizen
• Chattanooga shootings (July 2015): A Kuwait-born US citizen
• Charleston church shooting (June 2015): A US citizen
• Boston marathon bombing (April 2013): Two Russian citizens with Chechen ethnicity

There have been a few non-fatal attacks by individuals from two of the countries on the banned list.

According to the New America Foundation, 82% of all terrorism incidents since 2001 were conducted by citizens and permanent residents. Since 9/11, jihadists have killed 94 people inside the United States.