Refugee Ban

[Dr_Phibes]

This strikes me as a bit bizarre. It's a political shot but impractical. The vetting process for refugee claimants is already more stringent in any western country. Johnny terrorist would just come in on a tourist visa and not leave. :?
Poorly conceived and executed, might satisfy the chav vote and little else.

[Dr_Phibes]

Now a judge has chucked part of it out. Wonder if they even thought of existing visa-holders getting caught up in the mess? Probably not. So existing visa-holders who were sent back have the OK to return :?

[Rooster]

Terrorists are mixed in with these "refugees.".
http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/18/the ... s-in-2011/

Nothing has changed except ISIS has gotten better at infiltrating the West.

[Dan Vogel]

I understand the desire to keep the bad apples OUT.
I also understand that it will not work.

Here's what God said for the Israelites to do...


Deuteronomy 7:1-4
[1] When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;
[2] And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:
[3] Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
[4] For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly.


In these last days, an individual within a given country must face reality.

Read Matthew 17:1-9 and pay attention to v.5.


There is nowhere else to look, folks.




Have a nice day.

[Dr_Phibes]

If you were genuinely interested in the national security along these lines, the stop-gap policy is so riddled with contradictions as to be unworkable. That just came off as amateurish and a PR disaster. However the PM of the Czech Republic did approve.

[Mikey]

Pretty strange that they cite 9/11 as a reason for the ban yet none of the 9/11 perps countries of origin are on the list. Countries Trump is doing business in somehow were left off as well.

[Bucmonkey]

Countries Trump is doing business in somehow were left off as well.

What a surprise...

[Innocent Bystander]

Mikey, push that angle and don't let up on it.

Vogel, you are a man in a mixed marriage living in a foreign land. How dare you bring in that quote. Did you really process it before posting it? Besides, the United States of America are not Israelites - and neither are the Khazar descendents suffering from skin cancer occupying the region now. Deuteronomy does not apply to any of us.

You want people to pay attention to Matthew, quote it instead.

[Truman]

Pretty strange that they cite 9/11 as a reason for the ban yet none of the 9/11 perps countries of origin are on the list. Countries Trump is doing business in somehow were left off as well.

Dumbass.

...the media should also be truthful with the public and instead of claiming Trump singled out seven countries, it should note that the US Congress and Obama’s Department of Homeland Security had singled out these countries. It should have told us about theTerrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 rather than pretend this list was invented in 2017. Trump’s executive order said “countries of concern,” it didn’t make a list. That list was already made, last year and years before.

http://www.sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28 ... -tell-you/

[BSmack]

Good News Phibes - Trudeau has welcomed all those poor refugees to Canada : https://www.yahoo.com/news/canadas-trud ... 41176.html

Enjoy !

Those poor people. They will be forced to drink milk from bags.

[Mikey]

Pretty strange that they cite 9/11 as a reason for the ban yet none of the 9/11 perps countries of origin are on the list. Countries Trump is doing business in somehow were left off as well.

Dumbass.

...the media should also be truthful with the public and instead of claiming Trump singled out seven countries, it should note that the US Congress and Obama’s Department of Homeland Security had singled out these countries. It should have told us about theTerrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 rather than pretend this list was invented in 2017. Trump’s executive order said “countries of concern,” it didn’t make a list. That list was already made, last year and years before.

http://www.sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28 ... -tell-you/

What, exactly was incorrect about anything in my post?

The EO invoked 9/11.
Check.

It excluded Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt and Lebanon, the countries of origin of the 9/11 attackers.
Check.
(BTW it also excludes countries of origin of the Boston Marathon Bombers and the San Bernardino attackers).

It excludes Indonesia and other countries that are sources of Radical Islam where he just happens to be doing business.
Check.

You'd proudly suck his diminutive dick on demand if given the chance.
Check.

Dumbass.

[Dinsdale]

Check.

It excluded Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt and Lebanon.
Check.
(BTW it also excludes countries of origin of the Boston Marathon Bombers and the San Bernardino attackers).

It excludes Indonesia and other countries that are sources of Radical Islam where he just happens to be doing business.
Check.

Indeed. Because the EO only calls for enforcement of laws already on the books... dumbass. It wasn't Trump's list -- it was Congress and Obama's list.

[Mikey]

Indeed. Because the EO only calls for enforcement of laws already on the books... dumbass. It wasn't Trump's list -- it was Congress and Obama's list.

Uh, no it doesn't, dumbass.
The list was "on the books." Not the law. That list was created for a different, if related, purpose and may or may not have been comprehensive enough for that purpose. This is not about enforcement of an existing law.

Saudi Arabia should be the top of any of these "lists" BTW.

[Mikey]

Saudi Arabia should be the top of any of these "lists" BTW.

So you think Trump didn't go far enough? What is your take?

No I think what he's doing here is illegal and unconstitutional. But SA should have been on the list made for the original law.

[Mikey]

I also think this may be another of his smokescreens for something far more ominous, which would be his removal of the DNI and the chairman of the JCS from the principals committee of the NSC and replacing them with Reince Priebus and Steve Bannon, who is a white supremacist anarchist, avowed Leninist whose stated goal is to bring down the government of the United States.

Maybe he was cute as the crazy editor of Breitbart but this is starting to get serious.

[Mikey]

http://nyti.ms/2eUlGcm

Scroll down to 'Virulently Anti-Establishment."
He later "didn't recall" saying it but didn't deny it either.

Whatever the level of Bannon's insanity may be, restructuring the NSC into a political group to feed POTUS's infinite vanity is not a good idea.

[Mikey]

No I think what he's doing here is illegal and unconstitutional. But SA should have been on the list made for the original law.

What is in the Constitution that requires the United States to admit potential immigrants from anywhere? The Constitution does state that:

"The Congress shall have Power ... To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization ..."

Congress has passed some laws that give the DHS the power to suspend immigrants who have been in places that might present danger to citizens of the United States. Trump is trying to enforce this regulation (and others). It might be illegal. We'll find out soon enough from the courts. But what provision of the Constitution does it violate?

Obviously open to interpretation.


http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015 ... -be-valid/

[Mikey]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/world ... ghdad.html

Where was the outcry then?

Didn't you just post a link to it?

[Mikey]

Trump is not trying to ban all Muslims, which is the bullshit strawman position your article argues against. Trump is attempting to prevent people who intend to commit acts of terror on our soil from immigrating here. Whether and how he can effectively do that is subject to debate. But the debate is not one that involves the Constitution.

They're preventing people who have already been vetted, who already have green cards or permanent residence status and have lived here for years, from re-entering the country.

I guess the fact that they are all Muslims is just a coincidence.

[Dr_Phibes]

Those poor people. They will be forced to drink milk from bags.

Bagged milk = cheap milk, economy of scale. It's a pain mopping it up after all the explosions, mind.

[Mikey]

I do not know how anyone could possibly suggest that Bannon's politics coincide with Lenin's, other than both wanted to end a permanent Establishment political culture.

Where is the white supremacist evidence?

Regardless of the level of Bannon's insanity, what do you think of replacing the Chairman of the JSC and the Director of National Intelligence on the National Security Council (already being led by Gen Jack D Ripper) with a political hack who has no foreign policy or relevant military experience?

Maybe he really will get the press to just shut up, with threats of secretly sanctioned drone strikes?

[Moving Sale]

If Trump proposes an unqualified person to serve in any capacity, I will be opposed to it.

I think that is his question snowflake.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

...Bannon's insanity...

Oh...sorry...you said Bannon...ooops... :?

[Diego in Seattle]

...Bannon's insanity...

Oh...sorry...you said Bannon...ooops... :?

[Dinsdale]

Good News Phibes - Trudeau has welcomed all those poor refugees to Canada : https://www.yahoo.com/news/canadas-trud ... 41176.html

Enjoy !

Nothing to worry about.

[Dinsdale]

The EO invoked 9/11.
Check.

It excluded Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt and Lebanon, the countries of origin of the 9/11 attackers.

You know what other countries it excluded? Every country on earth not named Syria.

As far as the countries you list... are you capable of any reasoning?

Here's a hint, dumbass -- The USA has, or uses military bases in all of them.


Light coming on yet?

[Mikey]

The EO invoked 9/11.
Check.

It excluded Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt and Lebanon, the countries of origin of the 9/11 attackers.

You know what other countries it excluded? Every country on earth not named Syria.

WTF are you talking about? It included (didn't exclude) Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. Pretty sure they're not named Syria.

As far as the countries you list... are you capable of any reasoning?

Here's a hint, dumbass -- The USA has, or uses military bases in all of them.

Here's a hint, dubmass -- The USA doesn't have any military bases in Lebanon. Pretty sure it has a few in Iraq, though.

Light coming on yet?

And you don't think Saudis warrant any increased vetting, just because we have some bases there?

9/11 says you're full of shit, dumbass.

[Dinsdale]

You know what other countries it excluded? Every country on earth not named Syria.

WTF are you talking about? It included (didn't exclude) Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. Pretty sure they're not named Syria.

Wait... you're railing against an Executive Order that you haven't even read?

You're dismissed. Thanks for playing.

Here's a hint, dubmass -- The USA doesn't have any military bases in Lebanon.

The USA has, or USES military bases in all of them.

Reading isn't a forte of yours.

[Mikey]

So...they're only turning people away coming from Syria.

My bad.




You still think we don't have any bases in Iraq?

[Mikey]

BTW...

Here's Trump's own statement on the Executive Order -

"America is a proud nation of immigrants and we will continue to show compassion to those fleeing oppression, but we will do so while protecting our own citizens and border. America has always been the land of the free and home of the brave. We will keep it free and keep it safe, as the media knows, but refuses to say. My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months. The seven countries named in the Executive Order are the same countries previously identified by the Obama administration as sources of terror. To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting. This is not about religion — this is about terror and keeping our country safe. There are over 40 different countries worldwide that are majority Muslim that are not affected by this order. We will again be issuing visas to all countries once we are sure we have reviewed and implemented the most secure policies over the next 90 days. I have tremendous feeling for the people involved in this horrific humanitarian crisis in Syria. My first priority will always be to protect and serve our country, but as President I will find ways to help all those who are suffering."

I guess he didn't read it either.

[Dinsdale]

He apparently didn't proofread it.

There's only one country named in the EO, with a reference to Obama's list.

[Dinsdale]

Gotta love those peace-loving, tolerant liberals.


https://twitter.com/DymburtNews/status/ ... 8557132800


If you don't agree with their version of "tolerance," which means "support countries that laugh at the very idea of 'women's rights' and execute LGBT folks for being LBGT," then you're subjected to violence... because they're tolerant like that.

I don't remember the outrage and protests when Obama did the same thing 6 years ago... weird.

[Mikey]

He apparently didn't proofread it.

There's only one country named in the EO, with a reference to Obama's list.

And hence seven countries named, by reference.

You obviously aren't very well versed in the English language.

Either that or you're just an obnoxious argumentative asshole who, if somebody said the sun rises in the east, would say "no dumbass, it only rises in the east two days of the year. Don't you know geography?"

[Diego in Seattle]

Could Trump have left SA off the list because he has business dealing in that country?

One way to find out is to look at his tax returns.

Oh wait....

[Dinsdale]

Could Trump have left SA off the list because he has business dealing in that country?

ebus...

Jeebus... we're on page 2, and you still haven't figured out that it's not Trump's list?

I'll type s l o w l y...

Trump is enforcing a law enacted by the 114th Congress, and signed into law by President Obama. The list was made by Obama's Homeland Security Director. All the EO does is enforce an existing law.


Did I type slowly enough?

[Mikey]

Trump is enforcing a law enacted by the 114th Congress, and signed into law by President Obama. The list was made by Obama's Homeland Security Director. All the EO does is enforce an existing law.

You keep saying that. It sounds like a pretty good argument. I wonder why nobody else - not Trump, not his administration, not Eeyore McConnell - is making it?
You should send it in. You might have a lucrative job working for Rinsed Penis waiting for you.

[Dinsdale]

You keep saying that. It sounds like a pretty good argument. I wonder why nobody else - not Trump

to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order

But go ahead and keep cracking on other people's grasp of the English Language... it's fucking hilarious. I'd set about kicking your ass in this thread, but you're doing a wonderful job of it all by yourself.

[Mikey]

You keep saying that. It sounds like a pretty good argument. I wonder why nobody else - not Trump

to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order

But go ahead and keep cracking on other people's grasp of the English Language... it's fucking hilarious. I'd set about kicking your ass in this thread, but you're doing a wonderful job of it all by yourself.

You mean this?

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

That's not enforcing a law. He's invoking 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) to justify his action. The difference is pretty obvious.
But go ahead with your argument and your insults. It makes you look really really smart, which I realize is the Holy Grail of your existence.

So tell me again...how come you're the only one making this argument? You must be really really smart. There...feel good, MENSA?

[Dr_Phibes]

What makes Bannon unqualified to serve as a member of the NSC? If he is capable of holding a top secret security clearance, he would appear to be qualified. It isn't like he doesn't have the President's ear already.

Not addressed to me, but an exercise in common sense?

As an advisory committee, it should contain nothing but specialists in their chosen field. It's a resource for obtaining technical information and basing your decisions on the information you receive.

It strikes me that the value is compromised, when you appoint your political advisor, batman, guru - whatever their relationship to the principals committee. You run the risk of getting advice based on what someone wants you to hear, rather than sober analysis. I think Field Marshal BritBrite or whatever he is might be unqualified? Politicising military, strategic decisions is murky territory.

Given the unprepared actions of the last few days, beer-drinkers in coveralls making decisions and farting in the palaces of the mighty, might be a bad idea.

[Dinsdale]

So, how's all those "Syrian refugees" working out for Canada?

No sooner does your PM say Canada will take all the Islamatards that the US turns away, then they go commit a terrorist act... as ifto prove Trump right.