72 of the convicted terrorist came from countries on the Travel Restriction List.

[chromium]

That's kind of one reason the whole hyphenated American thing is rather silly. Better to say an American of Iranian descent. If that were the case, people would just say "I'm an American of..." "Stop right there buddy. You had me at American. Come on in..."

A citizen is a citizen. Having genes from a different part of the world doesn't change that.

This goes back to a general gripe of mine that citizenship is rapidly losing its privileges and most people seem to think everyone is and should be treated the same by the government regardless of citizenship.

The damn hyphen is just forcing an argument. What matters is even "citizens of iranian descent" were held up at the airports. The whopping 2 page EO concocted by a braindead madman didn't even consider them, or green card holders, and just prattled off that citizens of those countries are banned no matter what. Yes that includes americans with dual citizenship! They never get to escape their origins, a trend i'm noticing more and more from republicans (like the "birth gender" bathroom laws)

 

[chromium]

The issue is fairly simple, the 7 countries that are on the list are either failed governments, or governments which we have hostile relations with. How do you vet someone from a country when you cannot access the records of that person for due to the status of the host government? The people of Iran were just in the streets chanting "death to America" and the liberals want them to come to our country un-vetted.

What is afghanistan if not a failed government? I just read the taliban controls like half the country again. So why isn't it on the list? Or pakistan after it harbored terrorist #1 right in its military district? Or Saudi after it fights the attempt of 9/11 victims to seek justice in courts, and openly violates each and every principle that the EO mentions ("honor" killings, violence against women, persecution of religious and sexual minorities)

No one said they should be un-vetted. That's a strawman. But some of our citizens have done that too and so has other countries. They were celebrating 9/11 in Egypt, also not on the list

 

[chromium]

So the title of the EO is "Protecting the nation from foreign terrorist entry" Really, this is the only way to accomplish that, REALLY? Doesn't that insult greatly the intelligence agencies and airport security, that after 15 years of no attacks they suddenly became useless at their jobs? In fact you might as well start lay offs. And now these fools are standing with him, not even realizing they were insulted?

 

[chromium]

The original claim was this: Study Reveals 72 Terrorists Came From Countries Covered by Trump Vetting Order | Center for Immigration Studies

As it was specifically given, it has been debunked.

I don't expect conservatives and Trump worshipers to understand that.

Yeah and his follow up article says 24. This is the problem with anything from Faux News. When are conservatives going to learn that we immediately dismiss anything from there and it just hurts whatever they're claiming?

Not that 72 is a lot anyway, compared to 1 million iranian-americans

 

[truthatallcost]

What is afghanistan if not a failed government? I just read the taliban controls like half the country again. So why isn't it on the list? Or pakistan after it harbored terrorist #1 right in its military district? Or Saudi after it fights the attempt of 9/11 victims to seek justice in courts, and openly violates each and every principle that the EO mentions ("honor" killings, violence against women, persecution of religious and sexual minorities)

No one said they should be un-vetted. That's a strawman. But some of our citizens have done that too and so has other countries. They were celebrating 9/11 in Egypt, also not on the list

You wouldn't accept a list that includes any of those countries either, would you?

 

[truthatallcost]

"arrested" and "convicted" and "terrorist" are far from the same, yet this summary uses these terms interchangeably. Your headline says 72 "terrorists" yet buried in there is the fact only 33 were convicted, and i hardly think "very serious terror related crime" would lead to a 3 year sentence. So something in the details is way off. Since there's been 0 attacks from any of them here, i'm going with they were not at all an insurmountable threat. In fact, if this is true it's simply intelligence and law enforcement working as intended. There's bad apples in every group, doesn't justify extreme reactions that can only encourage revenge. The ultimate number that matters - 0 attacks in the past 40 years by citizens of those countries

I am interested in the following and not just selective information used for political purposes - how many of these 33 would have actually been stopped by this travel ban, and how many Saudi, Afghan, Egyptian, Pakistani nationals were similarly convicted? Actually it tells me some of that right there - 62 from Pakistan almost equals the entire list on the ban put together, oh and they harbored bin laden. Wonder what business dealings Trump has there to keep them off the list

That's right; Trump is building a new luxury high rise in Pakistan :doh

 

[chromium]

You wouldn't accept a list that includes any of those countries either, would you?

I would accept a list that includes Saudi Afghan Pakistan yes. Because actual terrorists who have carried out attacks have come from there, or they've given refuge to them. Syria is a warzone, i get it, but that also makes the need to allow refugees all the more pressing. The main issue i have is to not include those 3 due to Trump's business deals totally undermines any credibility. Motive does matter

 

[jdog]

What is afghanistan if not a failed government? I just read the taliban controls like half the country again. So why isn't it on the list? Or pakistan after it harbored terrorist #1 right in its military district? Or Saudi after it fights the attempt of 9/11 victims to seek justice in courts, and openly violates each and every principle that the EO mentions ("honor" killings, violence against women, persecution of religious and sexual minorities)

No one said they should be un-vetted. That's a strawman. But some of our citizens have done that too and so has other countries. They were celebrating 9/11 in Egypt, also not on the list

Personally, I would like to see them on the list also, but you cannot fault the government for at least taking action on the worst of the worst. To make the argument that because we do not ban all toilet Muslim countries and only ban the worst temporarily is an illogical and ignorant perspective.

 

[Diving Mullah]

In Black and White:

Study Reveals 72 Terrorists Came From Countries Covered by Trump Vetting Order | Center for Immigration Studies



(Continued on next page)

Just so you know there is no such Study was ever done. Another Made up news. Stop making up facts to fit your version of Reality. Only crazy people and now clearly Trump people do this.


Diving Mullah