Trump's "Muslim ban"

[bananaleaves]

I can't believe he's actually done it, these changes are happening so fast, even green card holders are not allowed to reenter the country if they leave.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/28/rights-groups-flooded-with-calls-as-people-fear-re-entry-to-us-will-be-denied?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

But muslims from Saudi Arabia are fine?

I cant believe what I am seeing on the news.

I'm not defending Trump but I am getting annoyed with people who they know better than him think it's OK to make stuff up. Yes, he's included countries where he has business interests, there is no ban on Muslims.

Lorelei, we didn't ban Irish people but we put foreigners with a legitimate right to be here in internment camps a few decades earlier. (Many) Americans believe this is war.

figure17 making stuff up? You mean like alternate facts?

There is no question of people thinking they know better than Trump - people DO. We are talking about a man who doesn't believe in human rights, women's rights, vaccination or climate change here. Frankly, my dog knows better than Trump and people need to speak out as loudly as they can.

Oh and just to add - in terms of 'many Americans believe this is war', if they did it's probably a good idea to target the countries that have actually attacked America. You know, like Saudia Arabia - home of 19 of the 9/11 terrorists. Rather than the 7 countries on the list, whose citizens have been responsible for ZERO attacks on America. I'm sure the fact that Trump has conducted 11 business deals in Saudi in the past 2 years have nothing to do with it though. Must just be a coincidence.

Oh and you may want to bear in mind also that if it's not a Muslim ban, why are Trump's reprehensible cronies tweeting about it using the hashtag #muslimban

Quite Fenella. Just because he does it doesn't make it OK for those in the right to do it too.

I understand all that Fenella and I agree with you but he supporters obviously don't. If you go around calling it a ban on Muslims, which it isn't although it's clearly aimed at them, you just leave an opening for Trump supporters how believe they've been misunderstood. It was that feeling that made them vote this morning at in the first place. You and I can believe they're wrong/stupid but that doesn't remove their right to vote or change the way they use their vote.

This morning? This way..

Why is a ban on Somalis better terminology for you than a ban on Muslims figure? They are both a ban on a section of humans for no logical reason. As Trump has given "terrorism" as the reason and gone on about ISIS it's not surprising people think he means Muslims.

It's not better terminology for me Devil, I've said repeatedly that the whole thing is abhorrent.

If "we" insist of changing the actual terminilogy to suit our argument (which is unnecessary as it's abhorrent either way) then the silent majority who voted this way because they were fed up of being ignored and misunderstood just get to feel that they were right, you were ignoring and misunderstanding them

I think he's terribly misguided. The equivalent of "it's only a short journey so I dont need a seatbelt"

He's banning huge huge groups of people from entering/leaving and placing all the attention on that. Terrorism doesn't confine itself to certain groups despite what he wants people to believe and this just deflects attention and who knows may give ISIS an opportunity to plan and carry out atrocities whilst everyone's so distracted by this latest Trump idea, he's got so many resources focusing on carrying out this.
terrorists of any nationality, part of a group or a lone wolf type ISIS sympathiser could already be on US soil quietly getting on with their plans whilst attention is deflected.
Meanwhile, all these innocent people who have done nothing wrong and have no intention of any wrong doing are punished ?
I'm not as eloquent as the vast majority on here or able to keep up with as much politically and I've only read this thread and a handful of articles so I've probably worded it all wrong. I just feel it's a big mistake, totally the wrong way of addressing the problems around potential terrorism and creating division and quite possibly an attitude within the terrorist groups themselves of determination to do something just to prove they can overcome any attempt to stop them :( surely he could have, if he was really worried about the threat out all his resources, quietly into more intelligence and surveillance?

Why is "banning all Somalis" any less offensive than "banning Muslims"?
Or is it that you agree they are both awful but are just being pedantic?
I think people are talking about a "Muslim ban" because that's what the Donald promised in his election campaign (he called for "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on") and that's what he is now enacting. I guess he's had to broaden it to entire countries to try to minimise the chances of successful legal challenge on grounds of religious discrimination.
But it is still discriminatory on the grounds of race/religion and I'll be damned before I stop saying bluntly that it's fascist. We have to do that to avoid a Nazi type situation. People who try to minimise what he's doing are contributing to the world becoming a much less safe place.

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928

In case anyone would like to sign...

Signed!

I have american-iranian relatives who emigrated to the US in the 1980s, they have been protesting at the airport and although they have citizenship, they are worried that Trump's actions are validating and legitimising racism, it's the message it gives to the population and the knock on effect that is a concern not just the immediate impact on those trying to enter/re enter the UK.

As my dad is from Iran, UK resident but not citizen despite living in this country over 50 years and about the least likely person to become a terrorist you can imagine, it's looking like he won't be able to go and visit his family in the US for a while (he usually goes there on holiday most years)
However this is peanuts compared to those with lives in the UK separated from partners or family because they were unlucky enough to be on a holiday or business trip when this all unfolded.

I actually feel a little bit sorry for Theresa the Appeaser, she must have thought she had a really good day with The Orange One on Thursday and now she's shafted herself for not speaking out against him sooner... he kept that one from her didn't he.

Sad, sad day for anyone with a sense of morality and fairness.

We have withdrawn from the largest trade block in the world. We need cash. We are not in a position to choose our partners now. That is the harsh reality.

We haven't withdrawn from the EU yet. And we certainly haven't left the common market which is separate to the EU.

It is for our representatives in a parliamentary democracy to decide the best way forward following an extremely close referendum which produced irreconcilable results in NI, Scotland and England/Wales.

If one of the consequences of leaving the EU and/or the common market is being forced to appease an increasingly fascist state, then our MPs may/should conclude leaving either or both is not in our best interests.

Problem is pigg that by not following through with the referendum result we will be moving away from our own democratic process. That is something that must never happen.

Well then we're between a rock and a hard place Chipping

We're fucked.

By putting the cover of nationality not religion on this ban Trump has hopefully hastened it's demise. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 makes it illegal to base immigration on national origin.

Back, you're talking about this with kindness to him as if he believes in the safety argument. He doesn't.

To the pp who mentioned internment a few decades ago - yes I know we did that and it was wrong then too. I made the point about the Irish to Treacle to see if it helped her to think around the issue a bit. Saying "what about things we did 50 years ago that were wrong" - er, we know they were wrong? And we expect world leaders to learn from history?

As for the PM the US won't be handing out agreements to us anyway.

The refugee ban has exceptions for minority religions, in this case anyone who is not a Muslim.

So why was a Yazidi woman held?

Problem is pigg that by not following through with the referendum result we will be moving away from our own democratic process.

I think a decision like this should never have been put into the hands of the citizens. I'm all for democracy but sometimes leaders need to make decisions for the greater good and this is one of those times.

I think Trump has achieved what he wanted. He has elicited a global reaction to his weasly-worded 'Muslim ban', and in so doing, has strengthened the distrust of Muslims in the USA.

Should there be a terrorist attack in the US by a islamic group in the future, all Trump will need to say is 'I told you so; these are evil people; we got to keep America safe, etc, etc'. Then, with the blessing of his many supporters, he will be free to round-up Moslems; ban them from practising their religion; put them in ghettoes; restrict their rights of movement in the country...

The man is a fascist. No doubt about it. Really really scary.