Immigration Ban

[ColoNoCoHusker]

 

That's yet to be seen, this administration better hope it leads to a better process or there will be hell to pay and they'll get trashed even further for it. Why would we continue an unsafe practice if it's seen unsafe by the current administration? That could be considered equally as reckless IMO as an all out ban. Like I said, there is a fine line to walk here and I'm assuming there has been some national security intel brought up that led to this ban that we all aren't completely aware of. It should make folks feel a little better that the Obama administration tagged these same countries as being dangerous, but it doesn't seem to be helping.

 

Let me ask you this, if it comes up later that there was real intel that led this administration to make this decision and it led to a better/safer process that you can't see until months down the road would you like this decision more?

 

Trying to cleanup the quote, BRI...

 

So this ban improving our immigration is based on hoping that it leads to a better process. You are also comfortable with trusting the "eyesight" of the current administration over facts & figures? Bannon and a few others have a track record of poor "eyesight" by most measures but I "see" what you are saying.

 

I guess I'm not comfortable ignoring ALL the evidence to this point to make the large assumptions that you are in "hoping" this is more/different than it is. I don't see how Trump/Bannon's opinion qualifies as "real intel". I also don't see how, within days of taking office, this intel would exist given how Trump has handled our Intelligence Agencies in his first week. By all accounts, these Agencies were not involved in this decision; if there was "real intel" it would have leaked, especially with the people that were forced out.

[Danny Bateman]

Look at the date on this - last November, a week after the election. Trump hadn't even taken power yet, and already people were seeing the path he intended.

 

How much further down this path does he need to go before people stop defending him? Unharden your hearts, FFS.

 

 

Miss Kendzior posted a rather impressive tweetstorm takedown of Bannon as well. Reading the whole thing may help inform you along that path towards making a more informed decision about him. Interesting theory at the very least:

 

 

Edit: I embedded the tweets. Not quite sure why Imgur decided to screw up the dimensions on that middle one - I tried to set them all to roughly 600 pixels wide. Sorry.

[VectorVictor]

I wonder when Trump will tweet or spicer will say in a press briefing that they were wrong and we need to protect ourselves against white nationalists.

 

More importantly, when will Trump issue travel bans and keep them out of the country, considering they've committed more than the lion's share of terrorist acts on our soil?

 

Or like the countries that Trump didn't issue bans for, could Trump have a vested interest in allowing White Nationalists free passage? Because what happened in Canada with that White Nationalist could happen here in America...

[BIGREDIOWAN]

 

 

That's yet to be seen, this administration better hope it leads to a better process or there will be hell to pay and they'll get trashed even further for it. Why would we continue an unsafe practice if it's seen unsafe by the current administration? That could be considered equally as reckless IMO as an all out ban. Like I said, there is a fine line to walk here and I'm assuming there has been some national security intel brought up that led to this ban that we all aren't completely aware of. It should make folks feel a little better that the Obama administration tagged these same countries as being dangerous, but it doesn't seem to be helping.

 

Let me ask you this, if it comes up later that there was real intel that led this administration to make this decision and it led to a better/safer process that you can't see until months down the road would you like this decision more?

 

Trying to cleanup the quote, BRI...

 

So this ban improving our immigration is based on hoping that it leads to a better process. You are also comfortable with trusting the "eyesight" of the current administration over facts & figures? Bannon and a few others have a track record of poor "eyesight" by most measures but I "see" what you are saying.

 

I guess I'm not comfortable ignoring ALL the evidence to this point to make the large assumptions that you are in "hoping" this is more/different than it is. I don't see how Trump/Bannon's opinion qualifies as "real intel". I also don't see how, within days of taking office, this intel would exist given how Trump has handled our Intelligence Agencies in his first week. By all accounts, these Agencies were not involved in this decision; if there was "real intel" it would have leaked, especially with the people that were forced out.

 

I'm making the assumption there is something more than what we've heard and that the press isn't going to report it in an fair and unbiased manner because they like stoking the flames because it's good for business. I could be way off, I admit that, but my experience in life thus far is telling me there is something more that they heard somewhere.

[Danny Bateman]

I thought this pretty much summed up how I feel. We're just not at all on the same page. Either with the implementation of this thing or the words coming out of their mouths.

https://twitter.com/jbouie/status/826151776973881345

[NM11046]

I thought this pretty much summed up how I feel. We're just not at all on the same page. Either with the implementation of this thing or the words coming out of their mouths.

 

https://twitter.com/jbouie/status/826151776973881345

Notice he didnt say skin color or religious affiliation.

[Danny Bateman]

I posted this in another thread about Trump and the Press. But, I thought it belonged here too.

 

 

 

A MASS SHOOTING at a Quebec City mosque last night left six people dead and eight wounded. The targeted mosque, the Cultural Islamic Center of Quebec, was the same one at which a severed pig’s head was left during Ramadan last June. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called the episode a “terrorist attack on Muslims.”

 

 

Almost immediately, various news outlets and political figures depicted the shooter as Muslim. Right-wing nationalist tabloids in the UK instantly linked it to Islamic violence. Fox News claimed that “witnesses said at least one gunman shouted ‘Allahu akbar!’,” and then added this about the shooter’s national origin:

 

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer exploited the attack to justify President Trump’s ban on immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries. “It’s a terrible reminder of why we must remain vigilant and why the President is taking steps to be proactive rather than reactive when it comes to our nation’s safety and security,” Spicer said at this afternoon’s briefing when speaking of the Quebec City attack.

 

But these assertions are utterly false. The suspect is neither Moroccan nor Muslim. The Moroccan individual, Mohamed el Khadir, was actually one of the worshippers at the mosque and called 911 to summon the police, and played no role whatsoever in the shooting.

 

 

The actual shooting suspect is 27-year-old Alexandre Bissonnette, a white French Canadian who is, by all appearances, a rabid anti-immigrant nationalist. A leader of a local immigration rights groups, François Deschamps, told a local paper he recognized his photo as an anti-immigrant far-right “troll” who has been hostile to the group online. And Bisonnette’s Facebook page – now taken down but still archived – lists among its “likes” the far right French nationalist Marine Le Pen, Islam critics Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the Israeli Defense Forces, and Donald J. Trump (he also “likes” the liberal Canadian Party NDP along with more neutral “likes” such as Tom Hanks, the Sopranos and Katy Perry).

 

And, yet...Spicer has the balls to constantly come on and scold the press for reporting and jumping on false news.

 

Disgusting but unsurprising. I can't believe Spicer tries to strut himself out there like some paragon for truth after pushing a heinous, false narrative like that. I wonder if we'll get another apology and retraction from Fox News?

 

I watched that thing unfold and purposely let it sit. It's in poor taste to try to immediately politicize acts of terrorism. People should let some of the facts roll in before they try to start using it for their political goals FFS. But then again, this is our new leader:

 

 

What I'm finding from this thread is we've got some folks like yourself and BRI who I'd deem "compassionate conservatives" that aren't chomping at the bit to kick the deportation force into full gear and instead want a reasonable reform with a path to citizenship. That gives me a lot of hope that that is the mainstream view for most of us now. I agree with BRI - if they don't commit crimes, we shouldn't look to punish them just because our immigration system is broken and we feel the need to enforce some antiquated law devoid of our own common sense.

 

The problem is the crazies seem to have a good hold of the direction of the GOP right now, and the crazies are for the most part, virulently anti-immigration.

[BigRedBuster]

The sick thing about this entire terroristic attack and how it was treated by various people like Trump, Spicer and Fox News.

 

They tried to make it..."See, we need to fear these Muslims who want to come kill us". Meanwhile, it was carried out by a guy who probably LOVES Trump and what he is doing and wishes Canada would do the same thing.

 

 

But...now....we will hear crickets chirping.....

[knapplc]

 

Let me ask you this, if it comes up later that there was real intel that led this administration to make this decision and it led to a better/safer process that you can't see until months down the road would you like this decision more?

That's been on my mind these past few days. I don't expect it, but what crossed my mind --- Playing devils advocate here / Complete conspiracy theory ---- is maybe this had something to do with the Super Bowl.... How would people feel if Trump had said that they have intelligence of a pending-attack and this EO will help prevent something from happening there. --- Conspiracy theory, I know, I don't see it as the case, but its food for thought.

 

I've thought about this to, and to answer BRI's question, yes, I would feel better about it, especially if it truly is temporary.

 

The problem with this theory is manifold:

 

1) Trump has been talking about a Muslim ban for more than a year. He wasn't acting on actionable intelligence in 2015 when his campaign started and this was one of his main talking points.

2) Steve Bannon, known anti-Muslim, either wrote or majorly contributed to the EO

3) This EO was not vetted by anyone outside Trump's inner circle. It is not moral, it may not be legal, and it's already having holes poked in it.

4) Those inside Trump's administration who did see the EO before it went out objected to it. They were ignored.

5) When Bush or Obama took an action remotely like this, they addressed the American people and explained that it was connected to actionable intelligence. Trump, clearly, has not done this.

 

If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

 

This is probably a xenophobic move by Trump/Bannon intended to drive a wedge between Americans. Let's call it what it is.

[TAKODA]

I am fairly confident that whatever holes are poked into his EO, they will be announced and deliberated on posthaste and the legalities explained to the senate, house, Trump as well as us citizens. I do not think they will impose their will without oversight in some fashion. As Bo so often stated, "A work in progress"

 

Not overly concerned we end up being a distant relative of North Korea or China.

[knapplc]

Remember when I said there would be "justification" for this from the White House? Here's one such WRONG attempt at justification.

Suspect in Quebec Mosque Attack Quickly Depicted as a Moroccan Muslim. He’s a White Nationalist.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer exploited the attack to justify President Trump’s ban on immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries. “It’s a terrible reminder of why we must remain vigilant and why the President is taking steps to be proactive rather than reactive when it comes to our nation’s safety and security,” Spicer said at this afternoon’s briefing when speaking of the Quebec City attack.

But these assertions are utterly false. The suspect is neither Moroccan nor Muslim. The Moroccan individual, Mohamed el Khadir, was actually one of the worshippers at the mosque and called 911 to summon the police, and played no role whatsoever in the shooting.

The actual shooting suspect is 27-year-old Alexandre Bissonnette, a white French Canadian who is, by all appearances, a rabid anti-immigrant nationalist. A leader of a local immigration rights groups, François Deschamps, told a local paper he recognized his photo as an anti-immigrant far-right “troll” who has been hostile to the group online. And Bisonnette’s Facebook page – now taken down but still archived – lists among its “likes” the far right French nationalist Marine Le Pen, Islam critics Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the Israeli Defense Forces, and Donald J. Trump (he also “likes” the liberal Canadian Party NDP along with more neutral “likes” such as Tom Hanks, the Sopranos and Katy Perry).

 

 

 

There will be more attempts at justification in the near future. DO NOT FALL FOR IT.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

Can anyone enlighten me on whether or not in previous detentions/interviews a refuge/immigrant was asked specifically "what their feelings were on Obamas' America"? Seems odd to me that one of the questions being asked of these folks is what they think of Trumps leadership.

 

Seems cult-like, and knowing him as we do at this point, he doesn't exactly have a positive bias toward anyone who disagrees with him.

I have no idea, but I personally don't like that question either. How is it relevant?

It seems downright fascist.

 

We are rapidly approaching a world in which fealty to the Executive is a requirement. All of us can choose to tolerate this, or not. We cannot be so dense so as not to recognize the erosion of liberty when we see it.

 

The fact that there have been protests at these levels since November, without military/executive punishments for protesting, proves we are not even remotely close to a fascist level.

 

So you think it goes 0-10 overnight?

[Landlord]

One thing I still don't get about the argument that this was or might have been necessary to review and reform our current vetting procedures,

 

 

What basis do we believe that reviewing our processes was only possible after we halted/banned the whole thing from happening? What's the train of logic here? That the same people who approve refugees are too busy, so we need to free up their workload to perform a review? Or that it's just far too dangerous before we know for sure if the vetting is satisfactory, even though we already know that it is?

 

Why couldn't those things have happened without this ban.

 

What knapp said is spot on. Look at all the pieces, without trying to go into a justification or best case scenario benefit of the doubt type of framework, and see this for the dog and pony show that it is.

[RedDenver]

I am fairly confident that whatever holes are poked into his EO, they will be announced and deliberated on posthaste and the legalities explained to the senate, house, Trump as well as us citizens. I do not think they will impose their will without oversight in some fashion. As Bo so often stated, "A work in progress"

 

Not overly concerned we end up being a distant relative of North Korea or China.

What about the federal judge ordering a partial lifting of the ban and Customs agents ignoring the order? That might be the most frightening thing of all. What if the executive branch just straight up stops complying with judicial rulings?

[Danny Bateman]