The terrorist have won

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

3 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

World reaction suggests otherwise.

Experiences worldwide support extreme vetting for those coming into our country. You either support it or just don't think our national security is a top priority.

 

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

 

[TheBlueVue 177]

15 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

So Rudy Giuliani says it is a Muslim ban and the National Security Advisor for Trump had a son who calls it a Muslim ban? But it's not a Muslim ban? Sure.

If its a muslim ban why weren't ALL predominantly Muslin nations included in the 60 day moratorium? Short answer is because it isn't a muslim ban. Once aim, the list of countries banned were put together by the Obama admin which brings to the obvious question...why didn't you pop a stitch when Obama banned Iraqi immigrants for 6 months?

The protesters objecting to this simply HATE Trump and are going to protest no matter what he does nor how ridiculous it makes them look.

[AUDub 11,167]

11 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Experiences worldwide support extreme vetting for those coming into our country. You either support it or just don't think our national security is a top priority.

And to our credit, the vetting process for refugees has been pretty effective. Refugees undergo multiple rounds extensive examination before they arrive in their host country. They don't even qualify for vetting by a host country until they've already been vetted by the UN (and waited their turn). Refugees have spent months or years under observation. It is not credible to worry that a Daesh fighter would get refugee status.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

4 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

And to our credit, the vetting process for refugees has been pretty effective. Refugees undergo multiple rounds extensive examination before they arrive in their host country. They don't even qualify for vetting by a host country until they've already been vetted by the UN (and waited their turn). Refugees have spent months or years under observation. It is not credible to worry that a Daesh fighter would get refugee status.

U.N. vetting is a joke IMHO. I don't want anyone vetting refugees coming into the U.S. except the U.S. I assume you have read this morning that Iran fired a ballistic missile in violation of a UN agreement. Do you think the UN will do anything?

[TitanTiger 20,509]

3 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

U.N. vetting is a joke IMHO. I don't want anyone vetting refugees coming into the U.S. except the U.S. I assume you have read this morning that Iran fired a ballistic missile in violation of a UN agreement. Do you think the UN will do anything?

Even if true, this would only matter if all we were relying on was UN vetting.   The vetting process we have in place for these refugees is very extensive and beyond anything any other immigrant applying for a visa goes through.

[AUDub 11,167]

1 minute ago, Proud Tiger said:

U.N. vetting is a joke IMHO. I don't want anyone vetting refugees coming into the U.S. except the U'S.

And we get to. It's a very thorough and long process.

The UN provides the refugee camps. Keeps them holed up for months or years at a time during both the UN and US vetting processes, and they are watched the whole time. You can be in a refugee camp in Jordan or you can be fighting in Syria, but it is not physically possible to do both at the same time, and it's not credible to expect someone to go back and forth without being identified.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

1 minute ago, Bigbens42 said:

And we get to. It's a very thorough and long process.

The UN provides the refugee camps. Keeps them holed up for months or years at a time during both the UN and US vetting processes, and they are watched the whole time. You can be in a refugee camp in Jordan or you can be fighting in Syria, but it is not physically possible to do both at the same time, and it's not credible to expect someone to go back and forth without being identified.

 

1 minute ago, Bigbens42 said:

And we get to. It's a very thorough and long process.

 

We also know it hasn't been good enough. A few terrorists have slipped thru. Nothing wrong with making it even tougher IMO. The sad part is that ordinary people are having to wait much longer than some of these refugees.I have a young American friend who married an Austrailian five years ago. After going thru everything imaginable, she still can't get American citizenship.

 

[TheBlueVue 177]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Even if true, this would only matter if all we were relying on was UN vetting.   The vetting process we have in place for these refugees is very extensive and beyond anything any other immigrant applying for a visa goes through.

There is an awful lot of wasted heartburn over Trumps 60 day immigration moratorium from 7 countries. After all this a total of 109 travelers were detained and the vast majority of them were released. Seems like a small inconvenience given the stakes of the game.

I will say, however, the responses from the left have proven Trump to be a genius. He has leftists complaining about the moratorium not going far enough with their questions about why SA and UAE weren't included AND as unbelievable as it sounds they're also quoting scriptures. Two things I never would have expected from them.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

2 hours ago, japantiger said:

Of course I've read it...non event.  Affected the 100 or so trapped in limbo between the time they boarded a plan overseas and landed in the US.  As for the substance of the order...no impact.   Still a limited-time-bound order aimed at putting processes in place to vet people from failed nation-states....all other nations; no issue....Keep on though...your mis-characterization and outright lies that this is a Muslim ban and continued meltdown and hysteria is just too damn much fun.   You know, since Madonna went back to the UK, I'm sure there's a march that needs a new speaker...maybe you could take her place....

I'd hardly call a federal judge ruling against an EO by the president a non event. The reason it is being referred to as a Muslim Ban is because those are the words Trump himself used and campaigned on. Rudy Gulliani told Fox News that he was asked by Trump to come up with a legal Muslim Ban. I really have to wonder if those of you here on the right even listen to the words of the man you so vehemently champion. Muslim Ban isn't something the left made up, it is a campaign promise that Trump made. So the only mischaracterization and outright lies are from Trump and his team. And from you.  My posting an opinion in a political forum that disagrees with your views is hardly a meltdown or hysteria. Nice try to insult me with the Madonna comment, but that was another mischaracterization on your part. I'm not a fan, nor do I think her comments at the Women's March were appropriate. 

[TitanTiger 20,509]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

We also know it hasn't been good enough. A few terrorists have slipped thru. Nothing wrong with making it even tougher IMO. The sad part is that ordinary people are having to wait much longer than some of these refugees.I have a young American friend who married an Austrailian five years ago. After going thru everything imaginable, she still can't get American citizenship.

You are confusing two things....entry vs citizenship.  No one is proposing anything other than allowing them into the country for asylum basically.  Your friend's wife is allowed into the country, she's just still here with a green card or equivalent.  She's not prevented from entering at all.  

The process for refugees being permitted in takes 18 months to three years just to be allowed on American soil.  They aren't jumping to the front of any line.

[TheBlueVue 177]

1 minute ago, GiveEmElle said:

I'd hardly call a federal judge ruling against an EO by the president a non event. The reason it is being referred to as a Muslim Ban is because those are the words Trump himself used and campaigned on. Rudy Gulliani told Fox News that he was asked by Trump to come up with a legal Muslim Ban. I really have to wonder if those of you here on the right even listen to the words of the man you so vehemently champion. Muslim Ban isn't something the left made up, it is a campaign promise that Trump made. So the only mischaracterization and outright lies are from Trump and his team. And from you.  My posting an opinion in a political forum that disagrees with your views is hardly a meltdown or hysteria. Nice try to insult me with the Madonna comment, but that was another mischaracterization on your part. I'm not a fan, nor do I think her comments at the Women's March were appropriate. 

That federal judge needs to read the Constitution. is anyone surprised shed contributed to Hillary and is an Obama appointee? Politics as usual from leftist activist judges.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

11 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Even if true, this would only matter if all we were relying on was UN vetting.   The vetting process we have in place for these refugees is very extensive and beyond anything any other immigrant applying for a visa goes through.

This seems to be a key piece of information that  people are missing. People coming here ARE VETTED. There was no credible threat that warranted this order. It was a campaign promise that he fulfilled. Nothing more than his ego and desire to prove his control without regards to the chaos he caused.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

7 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

You are confusing two things....entry vs citizenship.  No one is proposing anything other than allowing them into the country for asylum basically.  Your friend's wife is allowed into the country, she's just still here with a green card or equivalent.  She's not prevented from entering at all.  

The process for refugees being permitted in takes 18 months to three years just to be allowed on American soil.  They aren't jumping to the front of any line.

Sorry but you are wrong in this case. She has had a green card, Visas, etc. but can't get anymore, even temporary. I'm no expert but at this time she can't even come into the country, even though she is married to a lifelong American.

 

It sure didn't take very long for thousands of Syrian refugees to get on American soil last year.

[TheBlueVue 177]

The thing that is so surprising is that Trump is acting WELL WITHIN the Executive Powers granted by the Constitution.  People are beside themselves over this, truth be told, because they hate Trump. Its obvious. I don't recall reactions even remotely comparable to this when Obama's EOs were challenged and the SC ruled against them unanimously. There is no standing in trying to challenge this because the Constitution is quite clear that the Pres can do this anytime he feels like Americans' safety is at risk.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

4 minutes ago, TheBlueVue said:

That federal judge needs to read the Constitution. is anyone surprised shed contributed to Hillary and is an Obama appointee? Politics as usual from leftist activist judges.

Is she Hispanic too? Logic and critical thinking just fly out the window with the Right Wing crew.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Just now, GiveEmElle said:

Is she Hispanic too? Logic and critical thinking just fly out the window with the Right Wing crew.

Couldn't tell you but one I CAN TELL you is she needs to read the Constitution. She has no leg to stand in trying to halt this particular EO.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

27 minutes ago, TheBlueVue said:

If its a muslim ban why weren't ALL predominantly Muslin nations included in the 60 day moratorium? Short answer is because it isn't a muslim ban. Once aim, the list of countries banned were put together by the Obama admin which brings to the obvious question...why didn't you pop a stitch when Obama banned Iraqi immigrants for 6 months?

The protesters objecting to this simply HATE Trump and are going to protest no matter what he does nor how ridiculous it makes them look.

The Muslim countries where Trump has hotels weren't on the list. And those were the countries actually responsible for deaths of Americans. There has been no credible threat from the countries on the list. So why the ban at all?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

2 minutes ago, TheBlueVue said:

Couldn't tell you but one I CAN TELL you is she needs to read the Constitution. She has no leg to stand in trying to halt this particular EO.

And the Dems in Congress  are wasting a lot on time on stuff they know is going nowhere.. Just politics as usual. No wonde Congress has such a low rating, no matter which party is in control.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

7 minutes ago, TheBlueVue said:

Couldn't tell you but one I CAN TELL you is she needs to read the Constitution. She has no leg to stand in trying to halt this particular EO.

Then it sure is surprising that the ACLU, a number of attorneys and senators on both sides of the aisles are saying different. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/trumps-extreme-vetting-order-may-violate-the-constitution-2017-1

[TheBlueVue 177]

Just now, GiveEmElle said:

The Muslim countries where Trump has hotels weren't on the list. And those were the countries actually responsible for deaths of Americans. There has been no credible threat from the countries on the list. So why the ban at all?

HAHAHA aight den. I guess Obama anem made allowances for Trumps business dealings since ALL he did was temporarily ban immigration from a list of countries the Obama admin put together but, for them, was just another fraudulent nutless red line..

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

2 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said:

The Muslim countries where Trump has hotels weren't on the list. And those were the countries actually responsible for deaths of Americans. There has been no credible threat from the countries on the list. So why the ban at all?

Trump doesn't have hotels anymore. They have been legally turned over to his family to run.

[metafour 4,969]

Just now, GiveEmElle said:

The Muslim countries where Trump has hotels weren't on the list.

Why do you keep pushing this? You clearly possess zero political insight.  Those countries have long been in business with the American government, long before Trump was even a presidential nominee, thus your attempt to put Saudi Arabia's (for instance) omission from the list as some sort of Trump "business ploy" is completely oblivious to the fact that the previous government was knees-deep in Saudi Arabian money (hence why they didn't make OBAMA's list and why Hillary was swimming in donation money from the Saudi's).  You're in Syria right now to push a Qatar/Saudi oil pipeline sunshine, and it wasn't Trump who sent you there.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

2 minutes ago, TheBlueVue said:

HAHAHA aight den. I guess Obama anem made allowances for Trumps business dealings since ALL he did was temporarily ban immigration from a list of countries the Obama admin put together but, for them, was just another fraudulent nutless red line..

When you can no longer argue your position in a clear concise manner, pivot to Obama and some irrelevant mockery.  Predictable.

[AUDub 11,167]

7 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

And the Dems in Congress  are wasting a lot on time on stuff they know is going nowhere.. Just politics as usual. No wonde Congress has such a low rating, no matter which party is in control.

There's a legal leg to stand on here. Trump did not do this effectively.

Quote

The president’s power over refugee admissions is vast. His power to restrict visa issuances and entry of aliens to the United States is almost as wide. If the National Security Council had run a process of minimal competence, it could certainly have done a lot of stuff that folks like me, who care about refugees, would have gnashed our teeth over but which would have been solidly within the President’s authority. It could have all been implemented in a fashion that didn’t create endless litigation opportunities and didn’t cause enormous diplomatic friction.