On the Ban a thought:

[SassyIrishLass]

Jews weren't responsible for 9/11.

If Bush hadn't been sitting and doing nothing, most likely 9/11 would never have happened.

Or if Clinton had of taken Bin Laden when he had the chance.

 

[NoNukes]

The OP is making a fallacious characterization. It's not a ban, it's a suspension for a few months while processes are evaluated to ensure that proper vetting takes place. Obabble did the same thing for Iraqi refugees in 2011.

Is this an alternative fact?

 

[martybegan]

The OP is making a fallacious characterization. It's not a ban, it's a suspension for a few months while processes are evaluated to ensure that proper vetting takes place. Obabble did the same thing for Iraqi refugees in 2011.

Fair enough... So what number of Refugees do you think is would be acceptable for the US to take for 2017, 2018....

I being fair... If he feels he needs to increase the security and needs do that fair enough...

Can I also point out that that terrorist attacks on US Soil(mainland) have not come these countries and why didn't they target where the number one provider country to terrorist attacks in USA, Saudi Arabia...

By the way I think banning Saudi Arabia is counter productive... While Saudis are the number supplier they are also one of the highest defenders against terrorism as well.. But Saudi is very complicated and a different discussion...

The difference is the Saudis now are much more investigative of their own radicals, and have tighter border controls than any of the countries as part of the moratorium (which is what it is, not a ban).

What exactly is the difference between a moratorium and a ban?

bans tend to be permanent things, moratoriums usually have a defined end date, and have an explicit term.

 

[martybegan]

Jews weren't responsible for 9/11.

If Bush hadn't been sitting and doing nothing, most likely 9/11 would never have happened.

So Bush should have been there with a MANPADS ready to shoot down the airliners? Or he should have been at the airports, screening the passengers himself?

Maybe he should have taken the warnings seriously

any maybe unicorn farts could have warned him as well. How many different warnings do presidents get about how many different threats?

Hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[martybegan]

The OP is making a fallacious characterization. It's not a ban, it's a suspension for a few months while processes are evaluated to ensure that proper vetting takes place. Obabble did the same thing for Iraqi refugees in 2011.

Is this an alternative fact?

No, its the actual fact. The "muslim ban" talk is the exaggeration, i.e. lie.

 

[brummelben]

The OP is making a fallacious characterization. It's not a ban, it's a suspension for a few months while processes are evaluated to ensure that proper vetting takes place. Obabble did the same thing for Iraqi refugees in 2011.

Fair enough... So what number of Refugees do you think is would be acceptable for the US to take for 2017, 2018....

I being fair... If he feels he needs to increase the security and needs do that fair enough...

Can I also point out that that terrorist attacks on US Soil(mainland) have not come these countries and why didn't they target where the number one provider country to terrorist attacks in USA, Saudi Arabia...

By the way I think banning Saudi Arabia is counter productive... While Saudis are the number supplier they are also one of the highest defenders against terrorism as well.. But Saudi is very complicated and a different discussion...

The difference is the Saudis now are much more investigative of their own radicals, and have tighter border controls than any of the countries as part of the moratorium (which is what it is, not a ban).

What exactly is the difference between a moratorium and a ban?

bans tend to be permanent things, moratoriums usually have a defined end date, and have an explicit term.

Its still a ban whether it be a week or a year

 

[brummelben]

Jews weren't responsible for 9/11.

If Bush hadn't been sitting and doing nothing, most likely 9/11 would never have happened.

So Bush should have been there with a MANPADS ready to shoot down the airliners? Or he should have been at the airports, screening the passengers himself?

Maybe he should have taken the warnings seriously

any maybe unicorn farts could have warned him as well. How many different warnings do presidents get about how many different threats?

Hindsight is always 20/20.

He was warned repeatedly by his own national security but did nothing

 

[martybegan]

The OP is making a fallacious characterization. It's not a ban, it's a suspension for a few months while processes are evaluated to ensure that proper vetting takes place. Obabble did the same thing for Iraqi refugees in 2011.

Fair enough... So what number of Refugees do you think is would be acceptable for the US to take for 2017, 2018....

I being fair... If he feels he needs to increase the security and needs do that fair enough...

Can I also point out that that terrorist attacks on US Soil(mainland) have not come these countries and why didn't they target where the number one provider country to terrorist attacks in USA, Saudi Arabia...

By the way I think banning Saudi Arabia is counter productive... While Saudis are the number supplier they are also one of the highest defenders against terrorism as well.. But Saudi is very complicated and a different discussion...

The difference is the Saudis now are much more investigative of their own radicals, and have tighter border controls than any of the countries as part of the moratorium (which is what it is, not a ban).

What exactly is the difference between a moratorium and a ban?

bans tend to be permanent things, moratoriums usually have a defined end date, and have an explicit term.

Its still a ban whether it be a week or a year

Nope.

 

[martybegan]

Jews weren't responsible for 9/11.

If Bush hadn't been sitting and doing nothing, most likely 9/11 would never have happened.

So Bush should have been there with a MANPADS ready to shoot down the airliners? Or he should have been at the airports, screening the passengers himself?

Maybe he should have taken the warnings seriously

any maybe unicorn farts could have warned him as well. How many different warnings do presidents get about how many different threats?

Hindsight is always 20/20.

He was warned repeatedly by his own national security but did nothing

So should he have banned immigration at the time?

 

[brummelben]

Fair enough... So what number of Refugees do you think is would be acceptable for the US to take for 2017, 2018....

I being fair... If he feels he needs to increase the security and needs do that fair enough...

Can I also point out that that terrorist attacks on US Soil(mainland) have not come these countries and why didn't they target where the number one provider country to terrorist attacks in USA, Saudi Arabia...

By the way I think banning Saudi Arabia is counter productive... While Saudis are the number supplier they are also one of the highest defenders against terrorism as well.. But Saudi is very complicated and a different discussion...

The difference is the Saudis now are much more investigative of their own radicals, and have tighter border controls than any of the countries as part of the moratorium (which is what it is, not a ban).

What exactly is the difference between a moratorium and a ban?

bans tend to be permanent things, moratoriums usually have a defined end date, and have an explicit term.

Its still a ban whether it be a week or a year

Nope.

Donald Trump says CIA warned George W. Bush of Sept. 11 attacks

 

[usmbguest5318]

President Harry Truman did nothing about the Jewish Holocaust victims floating around on ships going nowhere except to pressure England to allow Jews to enter the God forsaken desert that nobody wanted in what was called "Palestine".

What revisionist history texts have you been reading?

• President Truman Statement and Directive on Displaced Persons (December 1945)
  
• United States Policy Toward Jewish Refugees, 1941–1952
  
• http://www.annefrankguide.net/en-US/bronnenbank.asp?oid=19221
  
• Truman Directive of 1945 - Wikipedia

 

[Iceweasel]

If Bush hadn't been sitting and doing nothing, most likely 9/11 would never have happened.

Oh, cool. So you found some specific threats. I wonder why it wasn't in the news. Go ahead and post it up.....

 

[SassyIrishLass]

If Muslims would behave this wouldn't be necessary. But again, and all throughout history, they've struggled to do that

Once again you blame an entire religion, over a billion people, for the actions of a few.

Which religion is behind the bulk of terrorism

 

[Iceweasel]

Its still a ban whether it be a week or a year

Yep, but a temporary ban because they don't believe the policy in place is adequate. We've seen what can go wrong in Europe but unfortunately liberals are incapable of learning. Following marching orders is all they can do.

 

[brummelben]

So you just blame all of them- right?

 

[martybegan]

The difference is the Saudis now are much more investigative of their own radicals, and have tighter border controls than any of the countries as part of the moratorium (which is what it is, not a ban).

What exactly is the difference between a moratorium and a ban?

bans tend to be permanent things, moratoriums usually have a defined end date, and have an explicit term.

Its still a ban whether it be a week or a year

Nope.

Donald Trump says CIA warned George W. Bush of Sept. 11 attacks

and they probably warned him about 20 other possible attacks. Again, you are using hindsight as a political weapon, and that's just stupid.

 

[brummelben]

Its still a ban whether it be a week or a year

Yep, but a temporary ban because they don't believe the policy in place is adequate. We've seen what can go wrong in Europe but unfortunately liberals are incapable of learning. Following marching orders is all they can do.

Why is a ban needed in the first place? How many refugees who have entered the US have done any damage? These people are vetted before ever coming here

 

[usmbguest5318]

If Muslims would behave this wouldn't be necessary. But again, and all throughout history, they've struggled to do that

Once again you blame an entire religion, over a billion people, for the actions of a few.

A very few and the penalty is being placed the wrong nations. It's even being generous to intimate that a nation state focused approach is in any way a rational approach to ensuring U.S. citizens' safety from terrorists.

 

[brummelben]

What exactly is the difference between a moratorium and a ban?

bans tend to be permanent things, moratoriums usually have a defined end date, and have an explicit term.

Its still a ban whether it be a week or a year

Nope.

Donald Trump says CIA warned George W. Bush of Sept. 11 attacks

and they probably warned him about 20 other possible attacks. Again, you are using hindsight as a political weapon, and that's just stupid.

So Trump lies again?

 

[martybegan]

bans tend to be permanent things, moratoriums usually have a defined end date, and have an explicit term.

Its still a ban whether it be a week or a year

Nope.

Donald Trump says CIA warned George W. Bush of Sept. 11 attacks

and they probably warned him about 20 other possible attacks. Again, you are using hindsight as a political weapon, and that's just stupid.

So Trump lies again?

No, they probably did warn him about an increased risk, but there were probably also other warnings about other possible attacks.

Word of advice, you aren't smart enough to get me in an actual "gotcha situation", so stop trying.