PDA

View Full Version : Trump's Muslim Ban



NorthWestPerm2Contr
28th January 2017, 18:21
Trump executive order: Refugees detained at US airports - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38783512)

Finally in action. Expected lack of uproar on this forum, despite the major implications of it. I imagine a fair few CUKers would like the same thing applied here in the UK.

Unbelievable, Outrageous and on Par with the kind of things Hitler did when he first came to power.... Yet nobody seems fussed. I guess we are ok if we are not a Muslim right?

Worst thing of it all is that Saudi isn't even mentioned despite nearly all the 911 bombers being from... you guessed it Saudi (and 911 was the pretext for this ban).

DimPrawn
28th January 2017, 19:26
http://cottinghamroadclub.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/96d1f7315827b85e67e905baad5a1243.jpg

PurpleGorilla
28th January 2017, 19:40
In terms of the U.S. Isn't this akin to banning North Koreans or Cubans.

scooterscot
28th January 2017, 20:11
Have read some republicans are having buyers remorse. A bit late now!

One wonders how far he'll go before he's stopped.

OwlHoot
28th January 2017, 20:24
http://cottinghamroadclub.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/96d1f7315827b85e67e905baad5a1243.jpg

Well actually, yes, with that loosened tie and your hair all over the place, you do look hot and bothered! :tongue

AtW
28th January 2017, 20:35
In terms of the U.S. Isn't this akin to banning North Koreans or Cubans.

Cubans had right to stay in USA id they managed to make it there - Obama canned it iust before he left office, North koreans simply don't get to escape in large numbers anyway - usually those that do represent good opportuniy to learn about NK regime

ladymuck
28th January 2017, 20:48
Cubans had right to stay in USA id they managed to make it there - Obama canned it iust before he left office, North koreans simply don't get to escape in large numbers anyway - usually those that do represent good opportuniy to learn about NK regime

I thought the Cuban right to remain being canned was in return for them not being thrown in prison when they went home? Essentially, they're safe to return so the right to claim asylum is no longer necessary.

I think what Trump is doing is awful, misguided, and is going to have much wider repercussions than he can imagine. Google are recalling their staff from overseas travel to try and get them back into the country before the noose tightens. I'm not shouting about it here because I don't believe Trump cares what the CUK forum members think.

scooterscot
28th January 2017, 20:51
I'm not shouting about it here because I don't believe Trump cares what the CUK forum members think.

The all seeing eye misses nothing.

US border patrol 'checking people's Facebook for political views' (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-immigration-ban-facebook-check-iraq-sudan-syria-mana-yegani-a7551256.html)


US border agents are checking people’s Facebook pages for their political views before allowing them into the country, an immigration lawyer has claimed.

kaiser78
28th January 2017, 21:00
Cue the leftie demos on London...

OwlHoot
28th January 2017, 21:07
The all seeing eye misses nothing.

US border patrol 'checking people's Facebook for political views' (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-immigration-ban-facebook-check-iraq-sudan-syria-mana-yegani-a7551256.html)

and what if they don't use Facebook or any of that bollox?

That might make them look even more suspect, if they're young, as it may be suspected they are concealing their thoughts and true motives! :laugh

I've long maintained that in a hundred years personal use of Facebook or something like it may be practically compulsory, and refusniks will be marginalised and financially disadvantaged. :eek

Mordac
28th January 2017, 21:15
The all seeing eye misses nothing.

US border patrol 'checking people's Facebook for political views' (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-immigration-ban-facebook-check-iraq-sudan-syria-mana-yegani-a7551256.html)

That's why I post all my "extremist" views on here, in complete anonymity. Only MF knows who I really am, and he'd never dob me in, even under torture. Oh sh*t, he would, wouldn't he. Bugger. I never wanted to go back to the US anyway...

scooterscot
28th January 2017, 21:21
No more twinkies on a stick for you.... unless May makes good on that import deal :banana:

http://cdni.condenast.co.uk/646x430/a_c/corn-dogs-easy-living-4jul13-istock_b_646x430.jpg

AtW
28th January 2017, 21:34
I thought the Cuban right to remain being canned was in return for them not being thrown in prison when they went home? Essentially, they're safe to return so the right to claim asylum is no longer necessary.

Yeah, because you can trust Castro's word, he even promised for them to have Playstation 4 Pros and latest LG OLED TVs in jail and absolutely no torture whatsoever...

Thing is, Trump bans people from countries where US forces have to or will have to fight, so having local support saves lifes of troops and the only way it could work if those guys get green cards after that, now even green card (!) holders are not allowed to come back in, with pretty much zero notice.

NorthWestPerm2Contr
28th January 2017, 21:49
Iraqi born MP unable to travel to the US with his family:

https://twitter.com/nadhimzahawi/status/825445925275500545

Being punished for being born on a different piece of land....

shaunbhoy
28th January 2017, 21:51
Iraqi born MP unable to travel to the US with his family:

https://twitter.com/nadhimzahawi/status/825445925275500545

Being punished for being born on a different piece of land....

NOT being able to visit the USA is not necessarily a "punishment". :tongue

MarillionFan
28th January 2017, 22:00
That's why I post all my "extremist" views on here, in complete anonymity. Only MF knows who I really am, and he'd never dob me in, even under torture. Oh sh*t, he would, wouldn't he. Bugger. I never wanted to go back to the US anyway...

Abraham, I'll never tell anyone why you hate Muslims. Ein be-a-ya.

NorthWestPerm2Contr
28th January 2017, 22:08
NOT being able to visit the USA is not necessarily a "punishment". :tongue

It's fine to have a bit of humour, but what has just happened is totally unprecedented in a western supposedly liberal country.

It's pushing things so far to the right I wouldn't be surprised if we saw another Hitler emerging in a number of years...

scooterscot
28th January 2017, 22:12
It's not even funny.

NickFitz
28th January 2017, 22:17
I believe I'm correct in saying that this order, had it been in force before, would not have prevented a single one of the terrorist attacks that have taken place in the USA.

It certainly wouldn't have prevented 9/11, as that was carried out by Saudis. Saudi Arabia isn't on the list :eyes

scooterscot
28th January 2017, 22:22
Sanctions against Sweden would be more effective at saving American lives. More people in the US have died from IKEA furniture these past 10 years than terrorism.

Mordac
28th January 2017, 22:26
Abraham, I'll never tell anyone why you hate Muslims. Ein be-a-ya.

Mazel tov my friend. :smokin

MarillionFan
28th January 2017, 22:34
I believe I'm correct in saying that this order, had it been in force before, would not have prevented a single one of the terrorist attacks that have taken place in the USA.

It certainly wouldn't have prevented 9/11, as that was carried out by Saudis. Saudi Arabia isn't on the list :eyes


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e63cwYxZAxk

Good video this from mid last year. 3.30 onwards is pretty spot on though.

scooterscot
28th January 2017, 22:44
He's talking SB's language. Spot on about the born and breed radicalised kid.

WTFH
28th January 2017, 22:51
It wasn't just a Muslim ban, but a ban on refugees.

I wonder if he has ever seen this quote anywhere:
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

MarillionFan
28th January 2017, 22:54
It wasn't just a Muslim ban, but a ban on refugees.

I wonder if he has ever seen this quote anywhere:
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Well considering he's from German stock, he's definitely got this Austrian meme going well.

SueEllen
28th January 2017, 22:59
My likes where for the fact I found out earlier today to stop the Muslim terrorist attacks in recent years he would need to banned citizens from Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Lebanon from entering the US in that order.

In addition he would need to ban all Muslim converts such as Richard Reid the shoe bomber.

All the 3 countries I've stated citizens are not banned from the US and neither are Muslim converts from any other country.

vetran
28th January 2017, 23:04
It is populist nonsense.

Playing to the crowd, suppose that's what you get if the previous incumbents ignored them.

shaunbhoy
28th January 2017, 23:25
Spot on about the born and breed radicalised kid.

Who is responsible for radicalising you scooter? My money is on Baldrick! :laugh

SueEllen
28th January 2017, 23:34
It is populist nonsense.

Playing to the crowd, suppose that's what you get if the previous incumbents ignored them.

The previous incumbents made the mistake of not telling them they were special as well.

Big Blue Plymouth
28th January 2017, 23:35
Trump executive order: Refugees detained at US airports - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38783512)

Finally in action. Expected lack of uproar on this forum, despite the major implications of it. I imagine a fair few CUKers would like the same thing applied here in the UK.

Unbelievable, Outrageous and on Par with the kind of things Hitler did when he first came to power.... Yet nobody seems fussed. I guess we are ok if we are not a Muslim right?

Worst thing of it all is that Saudi isn't even mentioned despite nearly all the 911 bombers being from... you guessed it Saudi (and 911 was the pretext for this ban).

Yes, I agree. It's shocking.

MarillionFan
29th January 2017, 00:02
Yes, I agree. It's shocking.

But overdue and needed.

Bee
29th January 2017, 00:08
... and the American will be forbidden to enter in that countries...
Another cold war.

woohoo
29th January 2017, 00:30
If the US wants to ban Muslims from specific countries that's their right, not bothered. I would ban any extreme religion if I had my way.

woohoo
29th January 2017, 00:31
... and the American will be forbidden to enter in that countries...
Another cold war.

You think they care?

greenlake
29th January 2017, 00:38
I would ban any extreme religion if I had my way.

http://i.imgur.com/kGQuA7I.jpg

woohoo
29th January 2017, 00:52
http://i.imgur.com/kGQuA7I.jpg

I've got a windows phone, so im ok jack.

AtW
29th January 2017, 03:05
If the US wants to ban Muslims from specific countries that's their right, not bothered. I would ban any extreme religion if I had my way.

What if they banned British, would that be ok?

NickFitz
29th January 2017, 03:37
And a federal court has, predictably, blocked enforcement of Trump's executive order pending a full hearing: Trump executive order: US judge temporarily halts deportations - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38786660)

Must be some kind of record for a president to be told to GTFO by a federal court within a week or so of taking office :eyes

SlipTheJab
29th January 2017, 05:11
Just saw the news and an Iraqi born Facebook software engineer has had to cancel his trip to Africa and is stuck in Boston, well done Donald your policy is working like a charm!

NotAllThere
29th January 2017, 07:31
In terms of the U.S. Isn't this akin to banning North Koreans or Cubans.Once again PG shows his astonishing ignorance of the world situation. This seems to be a level of stupidity that you'd actually have to work at to achieve.


That's why I post all my "extremist" views on here, in complete anonymity. Only MF knows who I really am...Not just MF. :wave


But overdue and needed.The thing is, MF, it doesn't work when you troll - there's just no real conviction in what you say. You're just not believable. :ohwell

It's a stupid, populist (hypocritical - doesn't mention the funders of a great deal is Islamic terrorism - Saudi) move that won't save a single American life, and will probably cause America more harm than good. As others have pointed out - not a single US life has been lost in the USA from any of the banned people group.

PurpleGorilla
29th January 2017, 08:22
Once again PG shows his astonishing ignorance of the world situation. This seems to be a level of stupidity that you'd actually have to work at to achieve.

It's ill thought out and goes too far. But banning citizens from other countries is not unprecedented in the U.S. It has happened before and people didn't get their knickers in a twist.

https://youtu.be/cAoXgZLRee0

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7364/trump-ban-muslims

woohoo
29th January 2017, 08:55
What if they banned British, would that be ok?

If the British majority started to follow an extreme religion then I could understand it.

SlipTheJab
29th January 2017, 09:36
If the British majority started to follow an extreme religion then I could understand it.

Three words... Church of England, those fetes are a breeding ground for radical cake based agendas!

SlipTheJab
29th January 2017, 09:41
Seriously though 95% of the nutters for 911 were Saudi, for decades they have used their oil money to promote their extreme form of Islam and fund terrorism, as well as liberally sprinkling (western sourced I might add) weapons at a piss poor country Yemen, if trump was serious he would have banned the house of Saud, but he isn't and its all a media game so let's ban a few countries who are piss poor have no oil or global influence instead, what a wank puffin!

SlipTheJab
29th January 2017, 09:42
Oh and no ban for Saudi by proxy i.e. Pakistan either!

woohoo
29th January 2017, 09:56
Three words... Church of England, those fetes are a breeding ground for radical cake based agendas!

Hah, religion annoys me. Just another way to control. COE how dare they dictate what cake I should eat at fetes.

scooterscot
29th January 2017, 11:41
I would ban any extreme religion if I had my way.

Well then perhaps then you should start with Christianity. No other nation on earth has split as much human blood as has America.

NickFitz
29th January 2017, 11:54
It's ill thought out and goes too far. But banning citizens from other countries is not unprecedented in the U.S. It has happened before and people didn't get their knickers in a twist.


Translated, what you're saying there is "Completely different actions done for completely different reasons under completely different circumstances didn't make people object, so I don't see why they should object now." This is not such a solid defence of your position as you seem to think it is :eyes

ladymuck
29th January 2017, 12:00
How about everyone bans everyone then there will be no need for anyone to travel anywhere and the environment and climate may just recover a little (although Trump is a climate change denier so he'll need an alternate fact). With no air travel, there's no need for a 3rd runway at Heathrow (or Tracy island for Boris), and we can turn our airports into housing estates. Assuming there is still some international trade, container ships will dock in international waters outside the countries they are delivering to, and locals will ferry the goods into their destination port.

DaveB
29th January 2017, 12:18
British Vet has been caught up in it as well. Trying to fly back from Costa Rica to the UK via New York. Told she was barred from boarding the flight and left stranded. Cost £2,600 to book new tickets via Milan. Won't be able to pay rent, bills, food etc as a result.

Funds raised for US flight ban vet to return to Glasgow - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-38788116)

Bee
29th January 2017, 12:21
After 24 hours a judge in the US cancelled part of the Trump's decree.
Finally, someone with good sense stopped the Muslims deportations in the airports.

ladymuck
29th January 2017, 12:24
British Vet has been caught up in it as well. Trying to fly back from Costa Rica to the UK via New York. Told she was barred from boarding the flight and left stranded. Cost £2,600 to book new tickets via Milan. Won't be able to pay rent, bills, food etc as a result.

Funds raised for US flight ban vet to return to Glasgow - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-38788116)

Well, she's not a British Vet. She's an Iranian living in Scotland. However, the principle stands that the new rule is completely nuts.

NickFitz
29th January 2017, 13:58
A lawyer writes:


This order reads to me, frankly, as though it was not reviewed by competent counsel at all...

I don’t believe that the stated purpose is the real purpose. This is the first policy the United States has adopted in the post-9/11 era about which I have ever said this. It’s a grave charge, I know, and I’m not making it lightly. But in the rational pursuit of security objectives, you don’t marginalize your expert security agencies and fail to vet your ideas through a normal interagency process. You don’t target the wrong people in nutty ways when you’re rationally pursuing real security objectives.

Malevolence Tempered by Incompetence: Trump’s Horrifying Executive Order on Refugees and Visas (https://lawfareblog.com/malevolence-tempered-incompetence-trumps-horrifying-executive-order-refugees-and-visas)

xoggoth
29th January 2017, 17:16
Doubt even many righties agree with this. We should not pretend there is not a growing Islamist threat and immigration controls do need to be tighter but if you target all Muslims so indiscriminately you may exacerbate the problem by increasing the resentment. Also the language used may make it harder for Muslims in the US to get jobs and harder for those who are willing to integrate to do so, again factors that could exacerbate the problem.

PS Mind you, even though I do generally believe in global warming, I do totally support Trump in not wanting to meet that **** Prince Charles. When are we going to get shot of the monarchy and house of Lords and aim for a real democracy?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4167660/Trump-avoid-Charles-UK-visit-climate-change.html

VectraMan
29th January 2017, 17:41
I guess this ends any hope that Trump was just saying these things to get elected and wouldn't turn out to be too bad once he got the keys.

SueEllen
29th January 2017, 18:48
PS Mind you, even though I do generally believe in global warming, I do totally support Trump in not wanting to meet that **** Prince Charles. When are we going to get shot of the monarchy and house of Lords and aim for a real democracy?

Trump to 'avoid Charles on UK visit over climate change' | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4167660/Trump-avoid-Charles-UK-visit-climate-change.html)

Not until you are long dead.

Unfortunately presidents like Trump and Sarkozy, and prime ministers like Blair and Camoron mean that the British people will not seek to have an elected head of the country. Plus his eldest son and his mother, the Queen, both seem to know unlike him when to keep their mouths shut.

pjclarke
29th January 2017, 19:59
So if the aim of the terrorists is to sow chaos and doubt ... have they won?


Anyone wishing to sign the petition requesting the State visit be cancelled


Donald Trump should be allowed to enter the UK in his capacity as head of the US Government, but he should not be invited to make an official State Visit because it would cause embarrassment to Her Majesty the Queen.

Donald Trump's well documented misogyny and vulgarity disqualifies him from being received by Her Majesty the Queen or the Prince of Wales. Therefore during the term of his presidency Donald Trump should not be invited to the United Kingdom for an official State Visit.



Can find it here https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928

pjclarke
29th January 2017, 20:11
President Donald Trump enters office facing low job approval ratings and skepticism from voters, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday.

The survey found that 36% of American voters approve of Trump's handling of his job after his first week, while 44% say they disapprove. By comparison, former President Barack Obama received a 59%-25% approval rating in the first Quinnipiac poll taken after his inauguration in 2009.

Asked how they expected Trump's presidency to turn out, 43% say they think Trump will be a "good" or "great" president, while 52% said they expect Trump will be "not so good" or "bad" -- with 36% expecting the worst.

Still, 53% of Americans said they are optimistic about Trump's presidency, and more say that Trump will help the economy than hurt it.
The Quinnipiac poll also found that American voters are critical of Trump's personal qualities. Large majorities say that he is not level-headed or honest, and 53% say that he "does not care about average Americans."

Working in Trump's favor: Slightly more say that Trump has good leadership skills (49% to 46%), and large majorities believe that he is intelligent and a strong person.
The Quinnipiac University poll was conducted between January 20 and 25, and surveyed 1,190 voters nationwide. It has a margin of error of +/- 2.8 points.


Not good, as his appeal was said to be to the 'ordinary joes' excluded by the system.

Poll: 36% approve of Trump's job performance - CNNPolitics.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/27/politics/trump-approval-rating-quinnipiac-poll/)

teapot418
29th January 2017, 20:13
Sir Mo Farah: Olympic champion criticises Donald Trump's US travel ban - BBC Sport (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/38788910)

For every Mo Farah, there's 100 ordinary citizens in the same boat.

NickFitz
29th January 2017, 20:15
For those wondering how Kafkaesque things might get: before the Executive Order was promulgated, some people who had valid visas boarded flights to the USA. While they were in the air, their visas were cancelled. When they landed in the USA, they were detained, charged with violating immigration law for trying to enter the country without a valid visa, and have been automatically given a five year ban from applying for admission to the USA because of that.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/29/trumps-muslim-ban-triggers-chaos-heartbreak-and-resistance/

woohoo
29th January 2017, 20:58
For those wondering how Kafkaesque things might get: before the Executive Order was promulgated, some people who had valid visas boarded flights to the USA. While they were in the air, their visas were cancelled. When they landed in the USA, they were detained, charged with violating immigration law for trying to enter the country without a valid visa, and have been automatically given a five year ban from applying for admission to the USA because of that.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/29/trumps-muslim-ban-triggers-chaos-heartbreak-and-resistance/

Their immigration control is pretty effective and efficient.

ladymuck
29th January 2017, 21:03
Clarification courtesy of BoJo

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/presidential-executive-order-on-inbound-migration-to-us

The Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has today held conversations with the US Government and as a result we can clarify that:

The Presidential executive order only applies to individuals travelling from one of the seven named countries.

If you are travelling to the US from anywhere other than one of those countries (for instance, the UK) the executive order does not apply to you and you will experience no extra checks regardless of your nationality or your place of birth.

If you are a UK national who happens to be travelling from one of those countries to the US, then the order does not apply to you – even if you were born in one of those countries.

If you are a dual citizen of one of those countries travelling to the US from OUTSIDE those countries then the order does not apply to you.

The only dual nationals who might have extra checks are those coming from one of the seven countries themselves – for example a UK-Libya dual national coming from Libya to the US.

teapot418
29th January 2017, 21:40
Clarification courtesy of BoJo

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/presidential-executive-order-on-inbound-migration-to-us

The Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has today held conversations with the US Government and as a result we can clarify that:

The Presidential executive order only applies to individuals travelling from one of the seven named countries.

If you are travelling to the US from anywhere other than one of those countries (for instance, the UK) the executive order does not apply to you and you will experience no extra checks regardless of your nationality or your place of birth.

If you are a UK national who happens to be travelling from one of those countries to the US, then the order does not apply to you – even if you were born in one of those countries.

If you are a dual citizen of one of those countries travelling to the US from OUTSIDE those countries then the order does not apply to you.

The only dual nationals who might have extra checks are those coming from one of the seven countries themselves – for example a UK-Libya dual national coming from Libya to the US.


Except that's not what is actually happening. (The Glasgow vet being a good example)

AtW
29th January 2017, 21:59
Their immigration control is pretty effective and efficient.

Let's see what Supreme Court says about it, Trump should have waited until his decisive candidate is accepted there first

yetanotherbob
30th January 2017, 00:16
I've long maintained that in a hundred years personal use of Facebook or something like it may be practically compulsory, and refusniks will be marginalised and financially disadvantaged. :eek
Yep, that's round the corner
https://www.checkmyfile.com/articles/2713/credit-reports/creditscoring---the-evolution-of-social-media-data.htm

This one gives you points for "transparency" depending on how many major social networks you are on.

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 19:02
And another Trump alternative fact to go with it:


“My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.”
— President Trump, statement on executive order, Jan. 29, 2017

This never happened, there was a slowdown due to administrative purposes but no actual halt was ordered...

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 19:13
https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_medium/public/thumbnails/image/2017/01/30/16/iran3.jpg
https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_medium/public/thumbnails/image/2017/01/30/16/iran4.jpg

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 20:28
So if the aim of the terrorists is to sow chaos and doubt ... have they won?


Anyone wishing to sign the petition requesting the State visit be cancelled



Can find it here https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928

And here's the counter attack, obviously written by a write-ringer :laugh

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844


Donald Trump should be invited to make an official State Visit because he is the leader of a free world and U.K. is a country that supports free speech and does not believe that people that appose our point of view should be gagged.

:spel:winker::spel

Bee
30th January 2017, 20:43
https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_medium/public/thumbnails/image/2017/01/30/16/iran3.jpg
https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_medium/public/thumbnails/image/2017/01/30/16/iran4.jpg

I think Trump has business in those countries.

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 21:04
It shouldn't be shocking, as it's part of his campaign promises - just like all the others he's been implementing. And the Hitler thing is just asinine.

That aside, it can hardly be considered a Muslim ban when over 80% of the world's muslims are not affected.

The list is Obama's list. It is a list of countries his administration decided were of 'particular concern' with regards to security & ISIS infiltration. The list originally excluded dual nationality persons (of those countries) from the visa waiver program.

Obama also used that list, before it was expanded in 2016, to prevent people from arriving from Iraq for a period of 6 months.



If it's a muslim ban, then you should really be throwing some accusations at Obama.

d000hg
30th January 2017, 21:12
Their immigration control is pretty effective and efficient.If by efficient you mean slow and painful to get through then sure.


It shouldn't be shocking, as it's part of his campaign promises - just like all the others he's been implementing.The fact he promised to do it doesn't make it somehow better. "But I told her I was going to rape her. I'm a man of my word"


That aside, it can hardly be considered a Muslim ban when over 80% of the world's muslims are not affected.He is on record as saying he wanted Muslims banned from entering the US. And now he's implemented a ban on people from strongly Islamic nations entering the US. Come on, you're seriously going to play Trump apologist on this issue? Even if the premise of it is good, the implementation is crassly incompetent, to the extent most other countries don't seem to know who is allowed in, people leaving the US briefly are prevented from returning even though they had a right to be there, etc.

It's farcical.

Bee
30th January 2017, 21:15
It shouldn't be shocking, as it's part of his campaign promises - just like all the others he's been implementing. And the Hitler thing is just asinine.

That aside, it can hardly be considered a Muslim ban when over 80% of the world's muslims are not affected.

The list is Obama's list. It is a list of countries his administration decided were of 'particular concern' with regards to security & ISIS infiltration. The list originally excluded dual nationality persons (of those countries) from the visa waiver program.

Obama also used that list, before it was expanded in 2016, to prevent people from arriving from Iraq for a period of 6 months.



If it's a muslim ban, then you should really be throwing some accusations at Obama.

That is completely differents because Obama created a list of countries with high risk of ISIS infiltration, not a ban on all the citizens.

Countries invaded and parts controlled by ISIS, are likely to be more dangerous and needs more careful on their control, furthermore, they are citizens from European countries that belong to ISIS.

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 21:25
Obama also used that list, before it was expanded in 2016, to prevent people from arriving from Iraq for a period of 6 months.



That is actually an 'Alternative Fact', the Obama administration actually did nothing of the sort and the proof is out there if you can be bothered to check it out. I'll give you a started for 10:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/01/29/trumps-facile-claim-that-his-refugee-policy-is-similar-to-obama-in-2011/?utm_term=.27b3fc8a3749
Sorry, Mr. President: The Obama Administration Did Nothing Similar to Your Immigration Ban | Foreign Policy (http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/30/sorry-mr-president-the-obama-administration-did-nothing-similar-to-your-immigration-ban/)

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 21:25
The fact he promised to do it doesn't make it somehow better. "But I told her I was going to rape her. I'm a man of my word"

I don't think it's wrong. In fact I think it doesn't go far enough. But the point I was getting at is that people seem genuinely shocked as in surprised.





He is on record as saying he wanted Muslims banned from entering the US. And now he's implemented a ban on people from strongly Islamic nations entering the US. Come on, you're seriously going to play Trump apologist on this issue?


He said no muslims. Then later he clarified and said no people from dangerous places who we can't vet properly. Then he implements it based on a list that Obama created and used.

*If* you want to focus on the first and least specific thing he said on the topic, which has been spoken about a lot for a long time since, AND completely ignore the fact that he didn't create the list - the executive order makes no mention of those countries or any religions - AND call it a muslim ban because Obama picked a load of muslim majority countries AND do the mental gymnastics required to reconcile the fact that if it were a muslim ban then the choice of countries was among the most useless possible...

... then it's clear that the truth of the matter is not a priority for you. But I'm sure that if you look it up you'll think less and less of it as a muslim ban.





Even if the premise of it is good, the implementation is crassly incompetent, to the extent most other countries don't seem to know who is allowed in, people leaving the US briefly are prevented from returning even though they had a right to be there, etc.

It's farcical.

This part is open to debate, and I'm happy for that to be so (although i'm not really interested in how well it was implemented).

The part I objected to was the Hitler hysteria which is responsible for so much violence now, and potentially much more in future.

If you really though he was Hitler (and a lot of people will believe silly things like that, despite around 120 million Americans not seeing it at all), would you do something terrible to save the world from him? All of this fake news driven hysteria is dangerous.

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 21:30
That is actually an 'Alternative Fact', the Obama administration actually did nothing of the sort and the proof is out there if you can be bothered to check it out. I'll give you a started for 10:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/01/29/trumps-facile-claim-that-his-refugee-policy-is-similar-to-obama-in-2011/?utm_term=.27b3fc8a3749
Sorry, Mr. President: The Obama Administration Did Nothing Similar to Your Immigration Ban | Foreign Policy (http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/30/sorry-mr-president-the-obama-administration-did-nothing-similar-to-your-immigration-ban/)

What about it is an 'alternative fact' ? That Obama created the list of states of particular concern, with regards to security aorund persons arriving from those states, used to restrict visas as per this FAQ?

https://www.niacaction.org/update-frequently-asked-questions-on-the-visa-waiver-restrictions-may-12/

Or the part about preventing Iraqi immigration?

pjclarke
30th January 2017, 21:34
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/445becab6e0b851c8bded99ff32d804fbe29bb52/0_0_650_443/master/650.jpg?w=940&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 21:34
Still...


2/3 of Donald Trump's wives have been immigrants
Proving once again that America needs immigrants
To do the jobs most Americans don't want to do

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 21:37
What about it is an 'alternative fact' ? That Obama created the list of states of particular concern, with regards to security aorund persons arriving from those states, used to restrict visas as per this FAQ?

https://www.niacaction.org/update-frequently-asked-questions-on-the-visa-waiver-restrictions-may-12/

Or the part about preventing Iraqi immigration?

Did you read the link?


I am an American citizen or green card holder who is planning to visit Iran. Does this affect my ability to return to the United States?

No. The law does not bar U.S. citizens or green card holders from re-entering the United States after travel to Iran. It solely affects travel between the 38 countries participating in the VWP and the United States. Iran is not eligible for the VWP.

Will the restrictions affect Iranian citizens in possession of or seeking U.S. visas, or Americans seeking to travel to Iran?

The restrictions do not affect Iranian citizens in possession of or seeking a U.S. visa. Iran is not eligible for the VWP, so Iranian citizens who are not dual nationals of countries eligible for the VWP are not affected by this law.

Not as offensive as Trump's little EO is it? 5 other US presidents have actually done exactly the same....

DaveB
30th January 2017, 21:39
What about it is an 'alternative fact' ? That Obama created the list of states of particular concern, with regards to security aorund persons arriving from those states, used to restrict visas as per this FAQ?

https://www.niacaction.org/update-frequently-asked-questions-on-the-visa-waiver-restrictions-may-12/

Or the part about preventing Iraqi immigration?

Not quite, the list of contries of concern was created, and travellers from those countries were no longer allowed to enter on Visa Waivers. They had to go through the formal Visa process. There was never a blanket ban on entry from those countries and it was still perfectly possible to get a visa as a national of one of those countries.

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 21:41
That is completely differents because Obama created a list of countries with high risk of ISIS infiltration, not a ban on all the citizens.


So you're saying that the list used to exclude individuals from the visa waiver program wasn't predicated on the majority religion of it's members' population? But was predicated on it's likelihood to be a hotbed of terrorist infiltration?

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 21:43
Did you read the link?



Not as offensive as Trump's little EO is it? 5 other US presidents have actually done exactly the same....

You didn't answer my question.

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 21:46
Not quite, the list of contries of concern was created, and travellers from those countries were no longer allowed to enter on Visa Waivers. They had to go through the formal Visa process. There was never a blanket ban on entry from those countries and it was still perfectly possible to get a visa as a national of one of those countries.

I never said there was a blanket ban. I said "used to restrict visas" and linked to the FAQ.

Obama stopped a certain amount of people from that list from getting visas, and Trump has stopped most people on that list from getting a visa.

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 21:46
So you're saying that the list used to exclude individuals from the visa waiver program wasn't predicated on the majority religion of it's members' population? But was predicated on it's likelihood to be a hotbed of terrorist infiltration?

There are only 38 odd countries eligible for the VWP anyway, China for example isn't one. All this did was to change it so that citizens who have either travelled or hold dual citizenship for Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen could no longer use the VWP. These people now had to perform the same visa application as someone from, for example, Poland....

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 21:47
I never said there was a blanket ban. I said "used to restrict visas" and linked to the FAQ.

Obama stopped a certain amount of people from that list from getting visas, and Trump has stopped most people on that list from getting a visa.

No, you didn't link to an official FAQ but one from NIA.

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 21:48
You didn't answer my question.

Trump stopped them, Obama just said they were no longer part of VWP but had to apply, big difference

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 21:50
Trump stopped them, Obama just said they were no longer part of VWP but had to apply, big difference

You seem strangely evasive. Which part of what I said was the 'alternative fact'?

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 21:52
No, you didn't link to an official FAQ but one from NIA.

No, what? I never said nor implied that there was some kind of official FAQ? I posted one. The one I refer to in my post is the one I linked to. Duh.

Your lefty is starting to show.

darmstadt
30th January 2017, 21:54
You seem strangely evasive. Which part of what I said was the 'alternative fact'?

I take it you didn't also read the post which had a comment...

Anyway, I leave everyone with this:

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16265795_1536685076358916_5193544467475275405_n.jp g?oh=e4200b9c000f6831bfb13ad8656f1d5b&oe=58FE796C

DaveB
30th January 2017, 22:01
What about it is an 'alternative fact' ? That Obama created the list of states of particular concern, with regards to security aorund persons arriving from those states, used to restrict visas as per this FAQ?

https://www.niacaction.org/update-frequently-asked-questions-on-the-visa-waiver-restrictions-may-12/

Or the part about preventing Iraqi immigration?

The alternative fact is your claim that the Obama administration used it to prevent people arriving from Iraq for 6 months. They didn't, they applied additional visa checks on those wanting to travel specifically on Special Immigrant Visas and refugees.

Sorry, Mr. President: The Obama Administration Did Nothing Similar to Your Immigration Ban | Foreign Policy (http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/30/sorry-mr-president-the-obama-administration-did-nothing-similar-to-your-immigration-ban/)

In the context of the thread your implication is that it was some sort of blanket ban. It wasn't.

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 22:02
I take it you didn't also read the post which had a comment...

Anyway, I leave everyone with this:

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16265795_1536685076358916_5193544467475275405_n.jp g?oh=e4200b9c000f6831bfb13ad8656f1d5b&oe=58FE796C

I acknowledge your concession.

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 22:08
In the context of the thread your implication is that it was some sort of blanket ban. It wasn't.

No, there was no such implication. In fact it was explicitly the opposite - for anyone who care to read what is written and not what they want to see. I even provided the link to the FAQ on the activist website.

The point that was made several times, which people chose to ignore, was that the list was formulated by Barak Obama in relation to terror threats, and that if one chooses to see it as a list of Muslims rather than a list of terror threats, then that person must also ascribe that prejudice to Barak Obama as well as Trump, and must also ascribe any 'arbitrary' or inconsistent nature of the list to Obama, rather than Trump, as it was Obama's list.

DimPrawn
30th January 2017, 22:10
I take it you didn't also read the post which had a comment...

Anyway, I leave everyone with this:

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16265795_1536685076358916_5193544467475275405_n.jp g?oh=e4200b9c000f6831bfb13ad8656f1d5b&oe=58FE796C

Thus proving, once and for all, that immigration often leads to a bad outcome...

WTFH
30th January 2017, 22:45
Spontaneous Spicer, your memory seems to be suffering. You say that he is only implementing campaign promises.
On the campaign trail he also stated that Obama was the founder of ISIS. Earlier he spent years claiming Obama was a Muslim.
...but stick with your alternative facts.

tomtomagain
30th January 2017, 23:07
Spontaneous Spicer, your memory seems to be suffering. You say that he is only implementing campaign promises.
On the campaign trail he also stated that Obama was the founder of ISIS. Earlier he spent years claiming Obama was a Muslim.
...but stick with your alternative facts.

And he was a prominent "Birther"

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 23:45
Spontaneous Spicer, your memory seems to be suffering. You say that he is only implementing campaign promises.
On the campaign trail he also stated that Obama was the founder of ISIS. Earlier he spent years claiming Obama was a Muslim.
...but stick with your alternative facts.

I don't understand anything you've written there. Are we talking about his campaign promises? Or his historical observations? (ISIS as we know it is, of course, a product of Obama policy in Syria). And what does either have to do with my memory?

That aside, are you suggesting that he did not make this moratorium a central part of his winning election campaign?

SpontaneousOrder
30th January 2017, 23:50
And he was a prominent "Birther"

Same question. Also, do you know what a straw-man is?

If you want to argue against Trump the man, then good for you - but I'm not interested.

I'm pointing out that one could find it surprising that so many people are 'shocked' that this happened, when it was a core part of Trump's platform which > 60 million people voted for, and the same number again failed to vote against.

NickFitz
31st January 2017, 00:05
The US Attorney General has now instructed the Justice Department not to defend the Executive Order against the forthcoming challenges in court: US attorney general defies immigrant ban - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38805343)

NickFitz
31st January 2017, 05:59
The US Attorney General has now instructed the Justice Department not to defend the Executive Order against the forthcoming challenges in court: US attorney general defies immigrant ban - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38805343)

…and now the the short-fingered vulgarian has purged the Attorney General: Trump sacks defiant acting attorney general - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38805944) :nazi:

WTFH
31st January 2017, 06:15
I don't understand anything you've written there.


That's because you can't handle the truth.


...crawl back under your bridge.

NotAllThere
31st January 2017, 06:40
That's because you can't handle the truth.And there was me thinking he doesn't understand because he's thicker than mince.

Nice statemanship from Trump there - blaming everyone else for his incompetence. I wonder if his republican handlers are letting him make a hash of things (or even encouraging him?).

darmstadt
31st January 2017, 06:44
It seems that a certain subsection of posters only come out late at night which makes think one of two things:

- they're part of Putin's sockpuppet troll army: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_brigades or
- they're Katie Hopkins: Katie Hopkins tweets out apology to Muslim family she linked to extremists – at 2am | The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/katie-hopkins-twitter-apology-muslim-family-extremism-links-mail-online-column-a7484436.html)

NotAllThere
31st January 2017, 07:23
It seems that a certain subsection of posters only come out late at night which makes think one of two things:

- they're part of Putin's sockpuppet troll army: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_brigades or
- they're Katie Hopkins: Katie Hopkins tweets out apology to Muslim family she linked to extremists – at 2am | The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/katie-hopkins-twitter-apology-muslim-family-extremism-links-mail-online-column-a7484436.html)I think it's because they get drunk and then come on here to vent. It explains why their posts lack clarity and logic. It also explains why you don't here much from them in the morning (they're too hungover).

scooterscot
31st January 2017, 07:30
Which is fine for them being hungover. Not all of us are so lucky, we still have to wake up each morning to the awful truth. :freaky:

He's treating the country like a business:

Trump sacks defiant acting attorney general (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38805944)

Just as well his businesses have a good track record! :tongue


Trump fires Sally Yates after acting US attorney general contradicted travel ban (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/30/justice-department-trump-immigration-acting-attorney-general-sally-yates)

PS: Is the firing not just a big who-ha? So what? He doesn't like her, she disagreed with him and lost her job. I don't have an issue with that like the media seems be doing. But I do fear a day when no one challenges the president at all when things are taken way too far Turkey style.

NickFitz
31st January 2017, 08:56
Which is fine for them being hungover. Not all of us are so lucky, we still have to wake up each morning to the awful truth. :freaky:

He's treating the country like a business:

Trump sacks defiant acting attorney general (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38805944)

Just as well his businesses have a good track record! :tongue


Trump fires Sally Yates after acting US attorney general contradicted travel ban (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/30/justice-department-trump-immigration-acting-attorney-general-sally-yates)

PS: Is the firing not just a big who-ha? So what? He doesn't like her, she disagreed with him and lost her job. I don't have an issue with that like the media seems be doing. But I do fear a day when no one challenges the president at all when things are taken way too far Turkey style.

The language used, ranting of "betrayal", seems ominous. Come to that, ranting itself isn't a good sign :frown

NotAllThere
31st January 2017, 08:57
PS: Is the firing not just a big who-ha? So what? He doesn't like her, she disagreed with him and lost her job. Yep - she's essentially just a cabinet minister.

pjclarke
31st January 2017, 09:07
I'm pointing out that one could find it surprising that so many people are 'shocked' that this happened, when it was a core part of Trump's platform which > 60 million people voted for, and the same number again failed to vote against.

Disingenuous, on pure numbers, more people favoured Clinton's programme.

But of course SO was the first here to embrace the fake 3 million illegal votes claim (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38774428). There's more to this Objectivism lark than I thought.

northernladyuk
31st January 2017, 09:09
Disingenuous, on pure numbers, more people favoured Clinton's programme.

But of course SO was the first here to embrace the fake 3 million illegal votes claim (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38774428). There's more to this Objectivism lark than I thought.

I swear to tell the truthiness, the whole truthiness and nothing but the truthiness.

BlasterBates
31st January 2017, 09:18
Donald Trump's team says 5-year-old boy was 'handcuffed and held' because he was a 'security threat' to the USA - Mirror Online (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/donald-trumps-team-says-5-9725070)

:laugh

pjclarke
31st January 2017, 09:19
President Donald Trump smashes record to get fastest majority disapproval rating ever (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/30/president-donald-trump-smashes-record-get-fastest-majority-disapproval/)

scooterscot
31st January 2017, 09:24
Donald Trump's team says 5-year-old boy was 'handcuffed and held' because he was a 'security threat' to the USA - Mirror Online (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/donald-trumps-team-says-5-9725070)

:laugh

The 'other side' will just claim he could have been one of those child suicide bombers.

Poor thing must have been terrified.

DaveB
31st January 2017, 10:58
Well it's certainly not making him popular in the States.

President Donald Trump smashes record to get fastest majority disapproval rating ever (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/30/president-donald-trump-smashes-record-get-fastest-majority-disapproval/)


In normal times, it takes American presidents hundreds of days before they reach a majority disapproval rating.

This has been the case for the last five presidents - with Bill Clinton being the previous record holder after taking 573 days to have more than 50 per cent of Americans disapprove of his presidency.

But Donald Trump, the billionaire businessman, TV star and now US president, has smashed this record after his victory on a wave of anti-establishment anger.

It has taken just eight days for him to gain a majority disapproval rating, according to Gallup polling, with 51 per cent of Americans saying they disapproved of the President on 28 January 2016.

lilelvis2000
31st January 2017, 11:25
The 'other side' will just claim he could have been one of those child suicide bombers.

Poor thing must have been terrified.

I'm sure you were being sarcastic but I read a few posts on twitter claiming just that!

scooterscot
31st January 2017, 11:32
I'm sure you were being sarcastic but I read a few posts on twitter claiming just that!

it has already occurred in Somalia or Sudan, and somewhere else in North Africa. Thrump is brewing hate, it'll not be long before they have another home grown incident at this rate.

SueEllen
31st January 2017, 11:37
I'm sure you were being sarcastic but I read a few posts on twitter claiming just that!

Trump is uniting people everywhere.

LondonManc
31st January 2017, 11:39
Well it's certainly not making him popular in the States.

President Donald Trump smashes record to get fastest majority disapproval rating ever (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/30/president-donald-trump-smashes-record-get-fastest-majority-disapproval/)

Like that's news! He only won the election because Hillary was the alternative.

northernladyuk
31st January 2017, 11:43
Like that's news! He only won the election because Hillary was the alternative.

Still, thank God HRC didn't win!

lilelvis2000
31st January 2017, 11:45
Like that's news! He only won the election because Hillary was the alternative.

But are the Dems kicking themselves for not nominating Sanders. Hell no! They're still attacking him. Meanwhile Dems are flopping about like fishes outta water.

LondonManc
31st January 2017, 11:50
But are the Dems kicking themselves for not nominating Sanders. Hell no! They're still attacking him. Meanwhile Dems are flopping about like fishes outta water.

There are clear echos of the Labour Party over here - the politicians want leaders that the voters don't. This is exactly what the people voted against and it's fried a lot of so called intellectual brains that are in shock that the common people have had enough of it.

VectraMan
31st January 2017, 12:14
Meanwhile Dems are flopping about like fishes outta water.

It's probably fair to say the sensible moderate types were too busy being appalled at what was happening that they didn't do a good enough job at putting forward their arguments. And still are. Same to a lesser extent with Brexit.

The turnout was 54.6%, which means far more Americans couldn't be arsed than supported either Trump or Clinton. Those are the common people.

NickFitz
31st January 2017, 12:34
I'm sure you were being sarcastic but I read a few posts on twitter claiming just that!

Trump's press secretary pretty much said just that at his White House press conference yesterday :eyes

northernladyuk
31st January 2017, 12:35
Trump's press secretary pretty much said just that at his White House press conference yesterday :eyes

The republic has fallen under the control of evil men.

NickFitz
31st January 2017, 12:38
Those are the common people.

<PrincePhilip>All Americans are common people.</PrincePhilip>

pjclarke
31st January 2017, 12:46
Trump's press secretary pretty much said just that at his White House press conference yesterday :eyes

Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you ...


To assume that just because of someone’s age and gender that they don’t pose a threat would be misguided and wrong

After all the parents of this US citizen, a resident of Maryland had literally hours to radicalise their son, tool him up and explain the seventy virgins thing.

Words fail me.

pjclarke
31st January 2017, 12:54
Sanctions against Sweden would be more effective at saving American lives. More people in the US have died from IKEA furniture these past 10 years than terrorism.

Also lawnmowers and pre-school kids with guns, apparently. Nothing like a demonised, fictional enemy 'them' for drawing the populace's attention away from real problems at home, as Orwell nearly said. Trumps base knows exactly what he is doing.

northernladyuk
31st January 2017, 12:57
So it continues.



Irish prime minister Enda Kenny today has ordered a complete review of the US Homeland Security controlled “pre-clearance” at Ireland’s two main airports in response to growing opposition in the Republic to the Trump travel ban.

Ireland is one of only six countries that allows American Homeland Security officials to vet travellers before they fly out to the United States.

The taoiseach said:

In respect of the policy introduced by the American government I disagree with. I will obviously say that to the president and vice president when I meet with them...

I have asked for a complete review now of the pre-clearance facilities here in Ireland in respect of the three departments dealing with this. So we can be absolutely clear about the importance of it.

Last night the Irish Department of Transport confirmed that one traveller was turned away at the gate to transatlantic flights in Dublin Airport.

Kenny will face calls today in cabinet from independent deputies who serve in his coalition government to suspend Homeland Security’s right to screen transatlantic passengers at Dublin and Shannon Airport until the Trump ban is lifted.

The children’s minister, Katherine Zappone, has written to the taoiseach ahead of the cabinet meeting in Dublin later on Tuesday warning Kenny that the travel ban may be unlawful to operate at Irish airports.

Zappone said that the US-Ireland pre-clearance agreement upholds the rights of people under Irish law. At present any traveller booked on a flight to the United States from Ireland is processed through US immigration in Dublin or Shannon before they board their flight or arrive in the United States.

Bee
31st January 2017, 13:23
After 24 hours a judge in the US cancelled part of the Trump's decree.
Finally, someone with good sense stopped the Muslims deportations in the airports.

PS: She was fired today for being against Trump orders.

When the politic interferes with the justice, is a way of a dictatorship. Just wait...

quackhandle
31st January 2017, 13:44
The republic has fallen under the control of evil men.

This is correct. Devil's work.:devil

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd290/quackhandle1975/trumpdevil_zpsgrvq4dez.jpg

qh

quackhandle
31st January 2017, 13:46
And my 1666th post! :eek

What is this telling us?

<plays The Twilight Zone music>

qh

BlasterBates
31st January 2017, 16:53
Support for Trump's ban (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration-iraq-iran-restrictions-travel-islamic-state-us-visa-a7552856.html)

darmstadt
31st January 2017, 16:56
Spicer again, I just love this bloke :tongue


Trump’s White House press secretary Sean Spicer just told reporters that the recent terror attack in a Quebec mosque that killed five praying Muslims and injured eight others is “a terrible reminder of why we must remain vigilant, and why the President is taking steps to be proactive.”

So let me get this straight. A terror attack against innocent Muslims by a white, Christian Trump supporter is proof that we need to ban Muslims from entering the United States? America, we have entered the Twilight Zone. Even in a world of Trump’s “alternative facts,” this ridiculous statement takes the cake for being one of the most illogical, insane things ever uttered from the White House.

Instead of pausing to reflect on how Trump’s own campaign rhetoric may have inspired Alexander Bissonnette, (the Islamophobic Quebec shooter who “likes” Trump on Facebook and is an ardent follower of Trump’s French ally Marine Le Pen,) to slaughter innocent Muslims during a prayer service, the White House is doing logic somersaults to blame — you guessed it — Muslims.

darmstadt
31st January 2017, 17:02
Build a wall...

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RX-dFQiV-8s/WJCh0jTKEdI/AAAAAAAAnQ8/Fam2dtXGfmokGNU_qjygKdjBt5D_n5ZIACLcB/s1600/WALL6.jpg

LondonManc
31st January 2017, 17:05
Spicer again, I just love this bloke :tongue

He's spot on with his logic. If there are no Muslims in Canada, then no Muslims would get shot in Canada. Absolutely flawless.

NorthWestPerm2Contr
1st February 2017, 17:28
Former Iraqi ambassador to US banned from visiting America - calls Donald Trump restrictions a 'betrayal' | The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iraq-ambassador-us-lukman-faily-donald-trump-muslim-ban-visit-america-immigration-restrictions-a7554861.html)

You couldn't make this stuff up......

Maybe trump is a good thing, finally people will start seeing the right for what they are.

SimonMac
4th February 2017, 09:27
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38864253

Is Trump brave/stupid enough to go after sitting judges, calling for their removal?!

Or is it just a matter of when not if

SueEllen
4th February 2017, 11:10
BBC 4 are rerunning "Nazis: A warning from history".

d000hg
4th February 2017, 17:12
Sanctions against Sweden would be more effective at saving American lives. More people in the US have died from IKEA furniture these past 10 years than terrorism.You may like to consider that the number of terrorist-related deaths is kept low by vigilant border-keeping. They put in a huge amount of money and work to keep it that way!

pjclarke
4th February 2017, 17:43
Trump travel ban: Seattle judge issues nationwide block - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38864253)

Is Trump brave/stupid enough to go after sitting judges, calling for their removal?!

Or is it just a matter of when not if


The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!

Latest Trump Tweet. His grasp of the roles of the executive, judiciary and Constitution seems a little, um, loose.

SueEllen
4th February 2017, 20:06
Latest Trump Tweet. His grasp of the roles of the executive, judiciary and Constitution seems a little, um, loose.

Very diplomatic.

When are you standing for MP?

alloverit
4th February 2017, 20:26
All I can see is Trumps approval rating cratering over the next few months. When it hits about 25% he better lawyer up because the calls for impeachment will be coming at him from every angle.

And to the people saying Obama made the list they've got some severe lack in critical thinking:
The list was 2 years old, who says it's still relevant?
The lists objectives could have been for something completely different making it also irrelevant.
And lastly, making a list inconsequential, it's what you do with it that matters, and Trump made an international farce, Obama, probably didn't even make the news (until now)

I swear Trump and a lot of Brexit supporters have no individual thoughts, they have a cheat sheet of dumb retorts - They say x, copy and paste y...

d000hg
4th February 2017, 22:47
Good to know Trump has such respect for the Obama administration's national security analysis after all.

lilelvis2000
5th February 2017, 20:08
He's spot on with his logic. If there are no Muslims in Canada, then no Muslims would get shot in Canada. Absolutely flawless.

I'm sure I saw a guy post something similar on Facebook. He also blamed Trudeau for letting them in.

So one can only think that the Muslims incited the shooting against themselves by having a mosque (which didn't look like a mosque) and praying in it.

This is the twilight zone.

lilelvis2000
5th February 2017, 20:11
Former Iraqi ambassador to US banned from visiting America - calls Donald Trump restrictions a 'betrayal' | The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iraq-ambassador-us-lukman-faily-donald-trump-muslim-ban-visit-america-immigration-restrictions-a7554861.html)

You couldn't make this stuff up......

Maybe trump is a good thing, finally people will start seeing the right for what they are.

former PM of Norway also stopped over a visit to Iran.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/world/europe/kjell-magne-bondevik-norway-dulles.html?_r=0

darmstadt
5th February 2017, 20:51
Is it possible to unsee something:

https://scontent.ftxl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16508428_1850810221856511_3207214114838267964_n.jp g?oh=c2f712cbe52c5035762c022e89a3f26a&oe=5944E2FA