Trump Signs Order to Restrict Refugees from 7 Countries But Not Saudi Arabia

He also left out Pakistan and Afghanistan, this is an utter joke. Waiting for comments from the Trump worshippers.

 

I'd love to abandon Salafi Arabia and let them and their takfiri clerics figure it out on their own. It's been a whole 5 days, I'll give Trump the benefit of the doubt that this is not the end but just the beginning of a pivot away from takfirism.

 

How many of the bombers were refugees? How many of the terrorists were refugees?

 

Read about him having a ton of investments in Saudi Arabia, this will never happen.

 

I liked this paragraph re the countries chosen.
+++++++++
Despite presenting such moves as a national security measure intended to prevent terror, the nations from which 9/11 plotters originated (primarily Saudi Arabia, but also including Egypt and the UAE) were left off the new ban. Also, while the US may fear blowback from wars in Iraq and Syria, and constant drone strikes in Yemen, they did not include Afghanistan, 15 years into America’s occupation, nor Pakistan, which has borne the brunt of America’s drone war.

http://news.antiwar.com/2017/01/24/report-trump-to-ban-citizens-of-seven-countries-visiting-us/

 

ref·u·gee
ˌrefyo͝oˈjē/
noun

1. a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
2. Nazi party was elected in Germany, ISIS is not

*free basic lessons of the day

 

I believe that is a big 0 in the USA.

 

A political move to satisfy his naive supporters, but effectively one that doesn't increase safety while causing more harms to the very people that need help.

 

It was never really about terrorism.
Can you spell
O.I.L.?

 

Though the article structured as an attempt to pull a trump on Trumpizim , these restrictions already in place since the 90s ,It will hurt those in needs no question about it.
But despite that,since Obama is gone , Russia started to fight ISIS and step out Iran from Syria, in courtesy of their Trump of course

 

Well, for one, bravo Trump, considering a lot of people were saying a while ago he wasn't going to do it.

He's restricting access from countries that are war-torn and can't be screened properly. Pakistan isn't war-torn. Afghanistan is a good question.

Still, it's a start.

 

I understand the logic of it. Not sure I agree, on humanitarian grounds, but it is a rational policy decision.

 

Yes, I agree with your view point.

 

So far, Trump policies that I agree with: restricting immigrants from 7 countries, minimum wage, TPP, Obamacare

Trump policies that I disagree with: net neutrality, not restricting immigrants from Saudi Arabia, Keystone Pipeline, corporate executives heading cabinet posts, his tax returns, compulsive lying, and being a Putin puppet.

 

Saudi has always had special privileges regardless who is potus or in charge. It's a joke and proof that there are other bigger factors at work here, even bigger than the office of potus. It's scary.

 

Saudi Arabia doesn't produce many refugees, so this particular criticism doesn't make any sense to me. The better criticism is why Afghanistan isn't on the list. I'm sorry for Syria, who is getting it from all sides.

 

I believe the line of thinking is that 15 of the 21 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi and KSA is the main exporter of both the money and ideology that fuel terrorism around the globe. Couple that with the idea that the perpetrators of San Bernadino and Orlando were American citizens (plus one Pakistani wife) and this seems like an ineffectual move.

Not to mention that groups like ISIS would love to drive an ideological cudgel between Muslims and the West, portraying us as insensitive to their suffering while selling Saudi the bombs that get dropped on Yemeni villages. I know it isn't that simple, but propaganda is rarely nuanced (meaning the propaganda these groups will create).

@Dei: Pakistan may not be "war-torn," but it certainly is lawless in many regions. I'd think the Iranian government has more control over what happens inside its borders than the Pakistanis.

 

That's the line of thinking but it doesn't make any sense. The hijackers came on normal visas, not as refugees. This is a refugee policy. The only refugees we'll get out of Saudi Arabia are active political dissidents. And since we're in bed with the king, we probably don't want to harbor his dissidents anyway. Why create a PR problem for our ally Saudi Arabia when we'll be turning away applicants in the interview process anyway?

Doesn't seem to be much point to put Iran on this list, except to defame them. Iran isn't producing many refugees either. We might have gotten their religious minorities and dissidents.

 

Look at King Trump signing all of these executive orders. I thought he was giving the government back to the people but now he's reigning like a king. Where are all those wingnuts that complained about King Obama and his executive orders? I guess it's not a big deal any more.