Banning All Muslims to Immigrate to USA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You didn't read or hear his speech. Try it first and his proposal is in there.

"I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger but now, many are saying I was right to do so -- and although the pause is temporary, we must find out what is going on. The ban will be lifted when we as a nation are in a position to properly and perfectly screen those people coming into our country.
The immigration laws of the United States give the President the power to suspend entry into the country of any class of persons that the President deems detrimental to the interests or security of the United States, as he deems appropriate.
I will use this power to protect the American people. When I am elected, I will suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats.
After a full, impartial and long overdue security assessment, we will develop a responsible immigration policy that serves the interests and values of America. "

Is this the part you are referring to? So, basically he is saying citizens of certain countries (not Muslims only) will be banned to enter USA. What about Muslim citizens of British, or Irish, or French or German - these are our Allies?

It is not as simple as the dEmagogue says. There is so much trade that happens in the region, military contacts and family relationships. How do you stop American citizen muslims coming back to the US after a business trip sent out by a US company? How do you stop family visits? American military has so many muslims in the region working in multiple roles, contractors, soldiers etc. It is simply not possible. Businesses will protest as will military and not to say Saudis and Turks who have significant influence. America is actually dependent on them for the military combats there. This guy is all bluster but when he is elected he will make more bluster and showmanship when in reality nothing will change. THAT IS HIS MO. Say whatever to get elected THEN keep the status quo and KEEP UP THE BLUSTER. But the not so intelligent gullible backers wont realize what happened and will be happy to hear the same sound bytes no matter what happens in reality.

Nothing different from every other President and elected official.

Er, no. No one else is saying that.

[Anonymous]

Trump's ban sounds like a great way to perpetuate ISIS's narrative: that the Western world is waging war on Islam.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Trump will apparently suspend immigration from Ireland:

"proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies.."

There is a well-documented history of terrorism by the Irish against our British ally.

For that matter, early Zionists committed many terrorist acts against our British ally as well. So, I guess Israeli immigration will also be suspended.

There is also a well-documented history of terrorism by the English colonists against our British ally. There is also a well-documented history of terrorism by the Indian colonists against our British ally.

That's right. I am also pretty sure that we could document a history of terrorism by Scots against our British ally and, since Trump is the son of a Scottish immigrant, maybe get him deported.

[Anonymous]

Here are the offiical statistics on refusal rates for B-1 (tourist) visas by country:
https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Non-Immigrant-Statistics/RefusalRates/FY15.pdf
Afghanistan is already at 61 % refusal rate.

I had a friend who worked in a US embassy approving visas. Most rejections are not for terrorism, but because there is belief the person intends to overstay their visa and/or work, which aren't allowed for this type of visa. So if you can't show strong ties back to your home country (property ownership, family, etc) you may be rejected. I also know a few people who were rejected (who happened to be white and not Muslim.. just because this was in Eastern Europe) -- typically people in their 20s with no strong ties to their home country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here are the offiical statistics on refusal rates for B-1 (tourist) visas by country:
https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Non-Immigrant-Statistics/RefusalRates/FY15.pdf
Afghanistan is already at 61 % refusal rate.

I had a friend who worked in a US embassy approving visas. Most rejections are not for terrorism, but because there is belief the person intends to overstay their visa and/or work, which aren't allowed for this type of visa. So if you can't show strong ties back to your home country (property ownership, family, etc) you may be rejected. I also know a few people who were rejected (who happened to be white and not Muslim.. just because this was in Eastern Europe) -- typically people in their 20s with no strong ties to their home country.

This goes to my prior point - we already ban people from coming without any regulation or law directing the state department to do so. So arguably, Trump could direct the state department to make the refusal rate 100% for countries x,y, and z. Of course, this would not be a ban on Muslims but rather on all persons from those countries.

[Anonymous]

The State Department is not allowed to make those decisions with no rules or guidelines. That would be an invitation to bribery and corruption. Every government decision has to be guided by standards and criteria adopted by a valid process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump's ban sounds like a great way to perpetuate ISIS's narrative: that the Western world is waging war on Islam.

So preventing people from entering your country is war?

Sounds like the left is starting to lose it

[Anonymous]

So would Trump ban immigrants from Belgium?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are the offiical statistics on refusal rates for B-1 (tourist) visas by country:
https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Non-Immigrant-Statistics/RefusalRates/FY15.pdf
Afghanistan is already at 61 % refusal rate.

I had a friend who worked in a US embassy approving visas. Most rejections are not for terrorism, but because there is belief the person intends to overstay their visa and/or work, which aren't allowed for this type of visa. So if you can't show strong ties back to your home country (property ownership, family, etc) you may be rejected. I also know a few people who were rejected (who happened to be white and not Muslim.. just because this was in Eastern Europe) -- typically people in their 20s with no strong ties to their home country.

This goes to my prior point - we already ban people from coming without any regulation or law directing the state department to do so. So arguably, Trump could direct the state department to make the refusal rate 100% for countries x,y, and z. Of course, this would not be a ban on Muslims but rather on all persons from those countries.

Why are you acting so dense. The PP pointed the reason - visitor visa is for visiting and immigrating. So, unless the visitor shows enough evidence to go back to the country of citizenship he is denied. Visa decision are many times reciprocative and affects international relations. It is not so simple to just banning citizens of a country without reason. Yes, a dictator can certainly do that. But hopefully you do not plan to elect Trump to be the dictator of US. Another aspect is a country who does not have a world leadership position can be unfair and many would not worry. However if US unilaterally bans citizens of some countries, it would create serious international relationship issues for us. In addition, how would that eliminate the perceived threat of Islamic radicalism? Muslims are citizens of Afghanistan and also citizens of Canada! Som terrorism around the world are perpetrated by British Muslims. Basically Trump is pointing his focus on the wrong target because he does not understand the complexity of this issue. Religion is not the problem, Hate is. Hate has no religion except may be Evil. No one is being apologetic. Trump and his supporters are blowing this incident disproportionately calling it Islamic Terrorism, to divert the attention from the real issue - semi automatic weapon in the hand of hateful angry person!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump's ban sounds like a great way to perpetuate ISIS's narrative: that the Western world is waging war on Islam.

So preventing people from entering your country is war?

Sounds like the left is starting to lose it

Learn to read.

[Anonymous]

It would be unconstitutional. In spirit if not in law but I think both. Our country's premise of freedom of religion is a cornerstone of our culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be unconstitutional. In spirit if not in law but I think both. Our country's premise of freedom of religion is a cornerstone of our culture.

Even if it were constitutional - it cannot be done. Islam is not written on the face of the person applying Visa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be unconstitutional. In spirit if not in law but I think both. Our country's premise of freedom of religion is a cornerstone of our culture.

Sort of, certain religon value systems are in direct violation of the constitution and freedom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be unconstitutional. In spirit if not in law but I think both. Our country's premise of freedom of religion is a cornerstone of our culture.

Even if it were constitutional - it cannot be done. Islam is not written on the face of the person applying Visa.

It would require asking for someone's religion which we don't currently do and IMO is fundamentally unamerican

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be unconstitutional. In spirit if not in law but I think both. Our country's premise of freedom of religion is a cornerstone of our culture.

Sort of, certain religon value systems are in direct violation of the constitution and freedom.

That is not how the first amendment works.

It's perfectly legal to hate democracy and live here. It's perfectly legal to talk about it. It's not legal to kill people for it.

The first amendment doesn't discriminate against ideologies.