Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we are discussing Trump's plan to ban "immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies" I went looking what the data looks like.

http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/07/terror-plots-against-the-us-by-country-of-origin

If this chart is correct, we are going ban citizens of UK to enter US for the time being...

What are we going to do about American citizens which tops the chart?

Are you implying we can't possibly identify regions/areas that have terrorist activities we should be concerned about? Are we this politically correct and stupid? How about we start with countries/regions where people came from already attacked us - Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Iraq, areas of Belgium and France, Somalia ... ?

So, we will go by your gut feeling to ban immigration from, when data points to something else. How would you prevent the 71% of the terrorist act that attributes to US and UK citizens? Or you are just interested to prevent the 29% which originates at your despised countries only? Political Correctness has nothing to do with Sensible policy, BTW.

Anonymous wrote:Since we are discussing Trump's plan to ban "immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies" I went looking what the data looks like.

http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/07/terror-plots-against-the-us-by-country-of-origin

If this chart is correct, we are going ban citizens of UK to enter US for the time being...

What are we going to do about American citizens which tops the chart?

In all fairness, it might make sense to combine many of those countries together due to the current state of affairs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we are discussing Trump's plan to ban "immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies" I went looking what the data looks like.

http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/07/terror-plots-against-the-us-by-country-of-origin

If this chart is correct, we are going ban citizens of UK to enter US for the time being...

What are we going to do about American citizens which tops the chart?

Are you implying we can't possibly identify regions/areas that have terrorist activities we should be concerned about? Are we this politically correct and stupid? How about we start with countries/regions where people came from already attacked us - Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Iraq, areas of Belgium and France, Somalia ... ?

For Europe we deal with it the same way the UK and Canada denied entry to members of Westboro Baptist Church.

This conversation is based on an infographic produced by the Heritage Foundation. Nothing produced by the Heritage Foundation is actually worthy of serious discussion.

Anonymous wrote:This pretty much sums up my refugee grandparents. But part of the deal is what happens with the second generation. I'm guessing many parents do this, but their kids recoil looking for 'identity'. They are then susceptible to homicidal messaging. If the community is not actively pushing back on this (is the immediate community doing enough?) and if you are not being pulled successfully into mainstream society, it's a problem. As we welcome 50,000 we need to be cognizant of what is happening in these communities to the first and second generation. The fact that the Pulse guy was hearing negative messaging in mosque, his dad was a terrible ass with vocal viewpoints who made trouble with the school about listening to women, the community knew he was weird, his coworkers lodged complaints that went nowhere, his wife did not turn him in, the FBI did not act on so many red flags, he could buy a gun (this loophole needs to be closed, and I'm a conservative. If the FBI is investigating you, you get on a waiting list for a gun - a long waiting list)--just makes me think we do not know how to properly deal with first and second generation refugees or immigrants from Islamic countries. We need to figure that out, first.

Prior generations had immigrants and children of immigrants assimilating, fighting in the Civil War, ww1, ww2. Not this conflict or negative messages. Some Christians changed here from RC or Eastern Orthodox to various Protestant denominations. Happy to be here, pay taxes, go to school, vote, belong to volunteer fire companies, etc.

FBI investigation with cause [ie mateen] should mean permanently no fly[unless leaving permanently ], no gun, no security job. No sponsering a bride etc.
But how do you deal with the bombers? Note police man and wife killed and the French Citizen Islamic Terrorist broadcast the video. Freaks.

Anonymous wrote:Since we are discussing Trump's plan to ban "immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies" I went looking what the data looks like.

http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/07/terror-plots-against-the-us-by-country-of-origin

If this chart is correct, we are going ban citizens of UK to enter US for the time being...

What are we going to do about American citizens which tops the chart?

Are you implying we can't possibly identify regions/areas that have terrorist activities we should be concerned about? Are we this politically correct and stupid? How about we start with countries/regions where people came from already attacked us - Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Iraq, areas of Belgium and France, Somalia ... ?

Anonymous wrote:When earlier immigrants came:

1. They did not fly home frequently.
2. They did not communicate on a daily basis with the "old country"....
3. They did not have dual passports--because they seldom traveled.
4. Their allegiance changed to US--they may have been proud of their heritage, but their loyalties were not divided.
5. They did not criticize the US as much--because they were grateful to be here.

I will grand you (1) and (2), since those are driven by technology changes, but I don't think you can say the make the same sweeping generalizations about the rest.

For (3), most other countries don't allow dual passports, which is why people give up their citizenships to obtain US citizenship. Depending on the stability of their home country, though, immigrants (like my parents), may opt to retain their home country passport and remain in the US with a Green Card indefinitely (they are now US citizens, but they waited until decades after they were eligible to naturalize). Most immigrants I know from places like the UK which allows for dual citizenship retain both passports.

For (4), again, not sure you can say that about immigrants from stable countries. I know a lot of W. European immigrants who still identify more with their W. European identity than their American ones. And (5) most of those people (and none that I know) do not hate America or want to commit terrorist acts.

Further w.r.t. (5), a lot of immigrants and native born American criticize the US. My immigrant parents do about certain things, and so does, BTW, Donald Trump. My immigrant parents also think there are many great things about the US...not sure where Trump stands on this.

This pretty much sums up my refugee grandparents. But part of the deal is what happens with the second generation. I'm guessing many parents do this, but their kids recoil looking for 'identity'. They are then susceptible to homicidal messaging. If the community is not actively pushing back on this (is the immediate community doing enough?) and if you are not being pulled successfully into mainstream society, it's a problem. As we welcome 50,000 we need to be cognizant of what is happening in these communities to the first and second generation. The fact that the Pulse guy was hearing negative messaging in mosque, his dad was a terrible ass with vocal viewpoints who made trouble with the school about listening to women, the community knew he was weird, his coworkers lodged complaints that went nowhere, his wife did not turn him in, the FBI did not act on so many red flags, he could buy a gun (this loophole needs to be closed, and I'm a conservative. If the FBI is investigating you, you get on a waiting list for a gun - a long waiting list)--just makes me think we do not know how to properly deal with first and second generation refugees or immigrants from Islamic countries. We need to figure that out, first.

Anonymous wrote:When earlier immigrants came:

1. They did not fly home frequently.
2. They did not communicate on a daily basis with the "old country"....
3. They did not have dual passports--because they seldom traveled.
4. Their allegiance changed to US--they may have been proud of their heritage, but their loyalties were not divided.
5. They did not criticize the US as much--because they were grateful to be here.

+1,000,000

Listen up, people.

When earlier immigrants came:

1. They did not fly home frequently.
2. They did not communicate on a daily basis with the "old country"....
3. They did not have dual passports--because they seldom traveled.
4. Their allegiance changed to US--they may have been proud of their heritage, but their loyalties were not divided.
5. They did not criticize the US as much--because they were grateful to be here.

And vet this who have already come. And find funds to properly support and integrate those who come. We seem to offer about one year of aid and rely almost entirely on charity after that. This worked for my grandparents, but pressure was much higher to assimilate then. Now we have identity politics plus very adept groups like ISIS with their seductive homicidal messaging. If there is not an speaking countermeasage (called opportunity and integration)of course havoc will ensue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we are discussing Trump's plan to ban "immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies" I went looking what the data looks like.

http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/07/terror-plots-against-the-us-by-country-of-origin

If this chart is correct, we are going ban citizens of UK to enter US for the time being...

What are we going to do about American citizens which tops the chart?

The FBI and other agencies are struggling as it is to monitor terrorists who are citizens of our country.
Shall we make their job even more challenging by bringing in immigrants, whom we know little about, to add to their list?

I did not understand. Are you suggesting we stop immigration from all countries, countries which are in this chart or something else?

To be honest, I would be fine with a very strict immigration ban temporarily. Very strict.
Until we get illegal immigration in check and determine a way to accurately and completely vet those coming in.....
And, maybe a more lengthy immigration ban from areas in which ISIS has a stronghold (or any other country where terrorists, of whatever stripe, are actively recruiting and killing citizens).
And, I think we need to reconsider the VISA waiver program. Too many terrorists have made their way into Europe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we are discussing Trump's plan to ban "immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies" I went looking what the data looks like.

http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/07/terror-plots-against-the-us-by-country-of-origin

If this chart is correct, we are going ban citizens of UK to enter US for the time being...

What are we going to do about American citizens which tops the chart?

The FBI and other agencies are struggling as it is to monitor terrorists who are citizens of our country.
Shall we make their job even more challenging by bringing in immigrants, whom we know little about, to add to their list?

I did not understand. Are you suggesting we stop immigration from all countries, countries which are in this chart or something else?

Anonymous wrote:Since we are discussing Trump's plan to ban "immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies" I went looking what the data looks like.

http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/07/terror-plots-against-the-us-by-country-of-origin

If this chart is correct, we are going ban citizens of UK to enter US for the time being...

What are we going to do about American citizens which tops the chart?

The FBI and other agencies are struggling as it is to monitor terrorists who are citizens of our country.
Shall we make their job even more challenging by bringing in immigrants, whom we know little about, to add to their list?

Since we are discussing Trump's plan to ban "immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies" I went looking what the data looks like.

http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/07/terror-plots-against-the-us-by-country-of-origin

If this chart is correct, we are going ban citizens of UK to enter US for the time being...

What are we going to do about American citizens which tops the chart?