Trump signs Executive Order banning certain foreign nationals from US.

[Wonderfulspam]

I've seen it suggested on other social media that Trumps ban could incite terrorism.

Which is amusing, because we've been told for some time that Islam & terrorism are unconnected.

& not forgetting of course that Islam is the religion of peace....

[Carana]

I have no problem with any country trying to improve national security. I don't have a problem with Sec. 10, either, in theory. However, unless there is currently a specific law prohibiting law enforcement from collating such information, or media from reporting on the nationality of perpetrators, I don't quite see the point of it.

I am also curious as to whether there will be an additional order to make terror-related information available involving US nationals.

If not, why not?


Sec. 10. Transparency and Data Collection. (a) To be more transparent with the American people, and to more effectively implement policies and practices that serve the national interest, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall, consistent with applicable law and national security, collect and make publicly available within 180 days, and every 180 days thereafter:
(i) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation, or material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national security reasons since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later;
(ii) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and
(iii) information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including honor killings, in the United States by foreign nationals, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and
(iv) any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses.

[Alfie]

I've honestly no idea..

But the MSM are quite happy to call it a 'Muslim Ban', not that they stir shit up or anything, despite the fact that, as I've pointed out, more muslim countries are excluded than included within the ban.

So, if you were controlling the media, this would not be a ban, nor would it be targeted at Muslims, right?  Despite the fact that Trump made it quite clear during his campaign that he wanted to ban Muslims from entering the US, it's still not a ban, and it's still not directed at Muslims.. Okie dokes then. %&5%£

[Carana]

More questions...

"After the US-led invasion of Iraq, the Middle East saw the largest refugee crisis since the Palestinian exodus from Israel in 1948. That has now been surpassed by the Syrian refugee crisis."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/datablog/2017/jan/28/us-immigrants-syria-iraq-iran-sudan-libya-somalia-yemen

- Why is there a specific and indefinite ban on Syrian refugees?

- Why are the countries of origin of the perps of the terrorist attacks cited as a rationale NOT on the ban list?

- The acts of the Norwegian white supremacist terrorist, Breivik, shocked the world. So why aren't all Norwegian citizens on the ban list?

[Wonderfulspam]

So, if you were controlling the media, this would not be a ban, nor would it be targeted at Muslims, right? Despite the fact that Trump made it quite clear during his campaign that he wanted to ban Muslims from entering the US, it's still not a ban, and it's still not directed at Muslims.. Okie dokes then. %&5%£

....."untill our countries representatives can figure out what the hell is going on"   (temporary)

...and millions of Muslims from Muslim countries, are not icluded in the 'Muslim' ban.

= not a Muslim ban.

[Carana]

Interesting to see how the Hebrew press has reacted:

 Hebrew media review
Far from US, Trump’s ban rankles Israeli press
A quadruple homicide in northern Israel and Trump’s executive order banning Muslim immigrants has papers in an uproar on Sunday

http://www.timesofisrael.com/far-from-us-trumps-ban-rankles-israeli-press/

[Carana]

....."untill our countries representatives can figure out what the hell is going on"   (temporary)

...and millions of Muslims from Muslim countries, are not icluded in the 'Muslim' ban.

= not a Muslim ban.

No, it's not a blanket Muslim ban (for the moment, anyway), contrary to his pledge during his campaign.

But why have certain majority-Muslim countries been selected and not others?

[John]

Do you think Americans living and working abroad in embassies for example are safer from the threat of terrorism today than they were a week ago?  Seriously, how does this lessen the threat from terrorism?  And why is threat of terrorism the number one priority when the number of deaths from gun crime and mass shootings far outstrips deaths from Islamic terrorist incidents on a year by year basis? 316,000 deaths by shootings since 2004 in the USA compared to 313 American deaths from terrorism worldwide.

http://kfor.com/2015/10/02/american-deaths-in-terrorism-vs-gun-violence-in-one-graph/

It is not an overnight fix but the US will be safer in the long term.

[John]

Bloody hell, John, are you for real?

If I was you, I'd batten down the hatches, bend over and kiss my arse goodbye.

Actually I had no time for Trump previously but I find him to be a man on a mission and a refreshing breath of fresh air blowing through a world of stale politics.  If he puts America back to work and annihilates the terrorists then I all for it.

[Carana]

Giuliani to the rescue...

He and various lawyers toned down Trump's original blanket ban on Muslims to those from specific countries that apparently represent a "danger".

What "facts" is Giuliani talking about?

Are the countries selected due to current specific intelligence concerns?

Or is it merely the fact (assuming that it is correct) that the US is currently bombing 6 out of the 7 countries?

"Friday’s executive order initiates an immediate 90-day suspension of issuing visas to people from select countries, which currently are Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Sudan and Somalia. The list could be expanded. But do you notice anything peculiar about this particular group of nations? It can’t be that nationals of all those countries have committed acts of terrorism in the US, because they haven’t. But it is true that six of the seven countries are currently being bombed by the US, and that most of these countries have also suffered invasions or overthrows by the US."

First, we bomb you. Then we ban you.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/27/trumps-executive-order-officially-gunning-for-muslims


Trump originally asked for ‘Muslim ban’ says Giuliani
Ex-NYC mayor and White House aide says US president sought legal avenues to ban people from ‘dangerous’ Muslim-majority countries
By AFP January 29, 2017, 2:33 pm 2


NEW YORK — Donald Trump originally dubbed his executive order suspending refugee arrivals and barring visas for travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries a “Muslim ban,” according to the US president’s aide Rudy Giuliani.

“When he first announced it he said, ‘Muslim ban,'” the former New York mayor told Fox News late Saturday when asked whether the ban was connected to religion.

“Show me the right way to do it legally,” Giuliani — who Trump has tapped as his cybersecurity guru — said the US president told him.

The 72-year-old said he and a team of legal experts “focused on — instead of religion — danger!” when they drafted the immigration crackdown that has sparked a global outcry and mass protests.

Trump’s sweeping executive order, signed Friday, suspends the arrival of refugees for at least 120 days and prohibits issuing visas for travelers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for the next three months.

Giuliani said those predominantly Muslim countries were targeted because they are “the areas of the world that create danger for us.”

“Which is a factual basis, not a religious basis,” he said.

The crackdown on Muslim immigration has infuriated civil rights groups and activists.

A federal judge blocked Saturday part of Trump’s ban, ordering authorities not to deport refugees and other travelers detained at US airports.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-originally-asked-for-muslim-ban-says-giuliani/

[John]

What is clear is that there is a showdown coming between the President and the federal courts.



A federal judge has blocked part of President Donald Trump's executive order on immigration, ruling that  travellers who have already landed in the US with valid visas should not be sent back to their home countries.

Lawyers  had filed a legal case in response to the order that includes a  90-day entry ban on citizens of seven Muslim-majority nations.

US District Judge Ann Donnelly's ruling  late on Saturday concerns dozens of people who were detained at US airports following Trump's actions.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which had filed a class action lawsuit against the ban, hailed the temporary stay of execution as a victory.

"This ruling preserves the status quo and ensures that people who have been granted permission to be in this country are not illegally removed off US soil,"  Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, said.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/01/trump-order-170129030842119.html

[Alfie]

....."untill our countries representatives can figure out what the hell is going on"   (temporary)

...and millions of Muslims from Muslim countries, are not icluded in the 'Muslim' ban.

= not a Muslim ban.

[Wonderfulspam]

I can't for the life of me imagine why Donald Trump would want stronger vetting of travelers from, let's say...

Syria.....

I mean, they've only been teeming with ISIS & in the grip of a nasty civil war for the past 5 years...

[Carana]

Actually I had no time for Trump previously but I find him to be a man on a mission and a refreshing breath of fresh air blowing through a world of stale politics.  If he puts America back to work and annihilates the terrorists then I all for it.

I'd agree with that, John, but I find that his simplistic and bombastic approach is more likely to achieve the opposite, IMO. He could have approached the issue in a much quieter fashion by simply ensuring that tabs were kept on current people travelling in or through the US, as well as on refugees, then announcing, once the reviews had been conducted, that the rules had changed.

He didn't do that though, did he? All it appears to have achieved is a perception of anti-Muslim rhetoric.

Does he really think that ISIS will simply go away and sit on a naughty step?

Will it protect the US from pre-existing sleeper cells?

Will it protect US citizens travelling abroad (and anyone else with them) from being primary targets?

Do you seriously think that ISIS won't use it to recruit more radical nutjobs?

[John]

I can't for the life of me imagine why Donald Trump would want stronger vetting of travelers from, let's say...

Syria.....

I mean, they've only been teeming with ISIS & in the grip of a nasty civil war for the past 5 years...

The US has woken up at last to the terrible reality that they cannot keep taking the world's refugees indefinitely.  People might not realise it yet but a new world order is about to be created.