(01-28-2017 10:51 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I think this all boils down to this:

1. We do need to get some issues straight with security and immigration.
2. Did it need to be so heavy handed?
3. Did it have to include permanent residents, education visas, and so on?
4. Why was the physical and financial home of Wahhabism (the movement responsible for Muslim extremism), Saudi Arabia, not included?

4. is obvious. They included the areas where terrorists roam freely.

2. isn't clear. The MSM can't be trusted. They constantly cry wolf. They are undoubtedly making this seem far worse than it really is. So is it a trivial problem or major? You can't tell. But its not a catastrophe.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(01-28-2017 11:50 PM)solohawks Wrote:  To summarize what has happened so far since a lot has happened

Trump issued an EO ugrading the extreme vetting of arrivals from the 7 countries implemented by the previous administration to an outright halt without any advance notice

A federal judge ordered an emergency temporary halt on the detention and deportation of those on US soil with the proper documentation, between 100 to 200 people, while leaving the order as a whole untouched and unaltered

So we can answer those claiming it was about where Trump had financial interests. No, it was simply the list given to him by Obama.

(01-29-2017 02:19 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Looking at statements from the rest of the World

In favor of ban:

Czech Republic
Russia

Neutral:

UK

Against:

Canada
Mexico
Turkey
France
Germany
Luxembourg

Canada and Luxembourg have been most vocal against, for different reasons.

I don't recall the constitution giving other countries a say in our immigration policies.

(01-29-2017 03:29 AM)shere khan Wrote:  http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-...le/2594016

So Obama did what Trump is doing on 6 different occasions. I don't recall any outrage from the left on here.

(01-29-2017 09:43 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 02:19 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Looking at statements from the rest of the World

In favor of ban:

Czech Republic
Russia

Neutral:

UK

Against:

Canada
Mexico
Turkey
France
Germany
Luxembourg

Canada and Luxembourg have been most vocal against, for different reasons.

I don't recall the constitution giving other countries a say in our immigration policies.

So all these refugees have places to go. Cool.

Yazidi refugees are being denied entry to the US. Yazidi do have some Christian beliefs. They are being massacred by the pigs called ISIS. Even Syrian Christians got turned back or held at airports. An elderly wheelchair bound grandmother is being hold at the airport to be deported back. This could be her last time to come and see her kids and grandkids.

Not everybody that are refugees are bad people. They are like the rest of us. They want the best for their kids to get away from those pigs that are murdering people.

(01-29-2017 10:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Not everybody that are refugees are bad people.

Can you link one instance of anyone saying different.

You get this is just trying to determine who may or may not be bad, right? You think that's wrong? Something wrong with stopping a bad actor BEFORE they can do their bad.

(01-29-2017 10:23 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Not everybody that are refugees are bad people.

Can you link one instance of anyone saying different.

You get this is just trying to determine who may or may not be bad, right? You think that's wrong? Something wrong with stopping a bad actor BEFORE they can do their bad.

Problem is that some people in this country think anybody from the Middle East are terrorists. In that one article, one of the father of the boy with cerebral palsy, are getting harassed including the son with the special needs. Others are getting loved with open arms. We have some people in this country that are sick that could do harm to people with disabilities.

(01-29-2017 10:26 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:23 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Not everybody that are refugees are bad people.

Can you link one instance of anyone saying different.

You get this is just trying to determine who may or may not be bad, right? You think that's wrong? Something wrong with stopping a bad actor BEFORE they can do their bad.

Problem is that some people in this country think anybody from the Middle East are terrorists. In that one article, one of the father of the boy with cerebral palsy, are getting harassed including the son with the special needs. Others are getting loved with open arms. We have some people in this country that are sick that could do harm to people with disabilities.

So point out the section of the Constitution that mandates we take refugees.

(01-29-2017 10:26 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:23 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Not everybody that are refugees are bad people.

Can you link one instance of anyone saying different.

You get this is just trying to determine who may or may not be bad, right? You think that's wrong? Something wrong with stopping a bad actor BEFORE they can do their bad.

Problem is that some people in this country think anybody from the Middle East are terrorists. In that one article, one of the father of the boy with cerebral palsy, are getting harassed including the son with the special needs. Others are getting loved with open arms. We have some people in this country that are sick that could do harm to people with disabilities.

There is NO other way to approach this issue now. At some point the system will be streamlined to target potential threats only. If you are coming into the US from one of the 7 nations? You just need to be prepared for your travel to possibly be delayed. This had to be done without notice. The reason is obvious. This will work itself out in a few weeks.

(01-29-2017 10:26 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Problem is that some people in this country think anybody from the Middle East are terrorists.

And some others think nobody is. Both viewpoints are insanely stupid.

(01-29-2017 10:26 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:23 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Not everybody that are refugees are bad people.

Can you link one instance of anyone saying different.

You get this is just trying to determine who may or may not be bad, right? You think that's wrong? Something wrong with stopping a bad actor BEFORE they can do their bad.

Problem is that some people in this country think anybody from the Middle East are terrorists.

Still waiting for a single instance of anyone saying this.

(01-28-2017 04:50 PM)pcm0103 Wrote:  You know I get what Trump is trying to do but this was poorly planned and causing way to much chaos. Iran just issued a ban on U.S. citizens with other countries soon to follow.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

lol.... oooohhhhh, I'm banned from a 3rd world crap hole.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Now the WH says green card holders won't be banned:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/po...arred.html

Maybe this bumbling band of buffoons should have taken 10 minutes to think this thing through? Or maybe asked an actual lawyer to look at it? Cowardly and stupid is a bad combination.

(01-29-2017 10:58 AM)58-56 Wrote:  Now the WH says green card holders won't be banned:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/po...arred.html

Maybe this bumbling band of buffoons should have taken 10 minutes to think this thing through? Or maybe asked an actual lawyer to look at it? Cowardly and stupid is a bad combination.

DJT is just winging it.

he doesn't have a clue.

(01-29-2017 10:58 AM)58-56 Wrote:  Now the WH says green card holders won't be banned:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/po...arred.html

Maybe this bumbling band of buffoons should have taken 10 minutes to think this thing through? Or maybe asked an actual lawyer to look at it? Cowardly and stupid is a bad combination.

I imagine they did. And this is what they found:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

Quote:(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

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

And the lawyers told him this action was fully within the powers of the President as spelled out in the US code of law.

(01-29-2017 11:05 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:58 AM)58-56 Wrote:  Now the WH says green card holders won't be banned:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/po...arred.html

Maybe this bumbling band of buffoons should have taken 10 minutes to think this thing through? Or maybe asked an actual lawyer to look at it? Cowardly and stupid is a bad combination.

I imagine they did. And this is what they found:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

Quote:(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

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

And the lawyers told him this action was fully within the powers of the President as spelled out in the US code of law.

lol

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(01-29-2017 11:05 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-29-2017 10:58 AM)58-56 Wrote:  Now the WH says green card holders won't be banned:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/po...arred.html

Maybe this bumbling band of buffoons should have taken 10 minutes to think this thing through? Or maybe asked an actual lawyer to look at it? Cowardly and stupid is a bad combination.

I imagine they did. And this is what they found:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

Quote:(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

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

And the lawyers told him this action was fully within the powers of the President as spelled out in the US code of law.

BURN!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk