• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

trumps new muslim ban absolutely is 100% ILLEGAL

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Is Trumps new Muslim Ban illegal?

  • Total voters
    70
brycejones said:
Frankly immaterial to my point. Are you denying that most of the actual terrorists associated to attacks in the US came from countries not on the list?
Click to expand...

Not at all. Those countries were chosen by the previous administration because "refugees" from those countries were considered actual terrorist threats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: x26
Sinsear said:
Lol. Can't wait for his Supreme Court nominee. Gonna drive the final nails in the liberal agenda coffin for decades.
Click to expand...
Here's the question none of you clowns are answering: what do you get out of this? How are you benefiting?

Or do you see yourself sacrificing some personal gain for the betterment of the whole country? And if so, what gets better for the country down this path?

Is it fair to say all you guys live in the same gated trailer park?
 
AnonymouseUser said:
Not at all. Those countries were chosen by the previous administration because "refugees" from those countries were considered actual terrorist threats.
Click to expand...

Yet most actual terrorists came from countries not on the list. Guess trump isn't really trying to improve security. Some red meat for the useful idiots such as yourself but no real change except to screw over innocent people who already followed the rules to come here.

Good job!
 
AnonymouseUser said:
Not at all. Those countries were chosen by the previous administration because "refugees" from those countries were considered actual terrorist threats.
Click to expand...
Plainly false in the case of Iranians.

There is not a plausible level of threat from visiting Iranians, at least compared to the far higher threat from Saudi Arabians and the like, where the practical concern for the US would be with Iranian government affiliated individuals if anyone who could be fairly filtered out through vetting if a concern. (An actual Iranian government espionage agent type would simply resort to the expedient of arriving on a visa with a false identity from a country not on the banned list.)

In fact, the average Iranian is a way lower threat profile than the typical Muslim from many other countries in that they are overwhelming Shiite who are enemies of ISIS and Al Qaeda and therefore extremely unlikely to be successfully recruited by these groups. Putting Iranians on the list in particular looks like either a rather arbitrary decision with a poor set of specific justifications behind it or a petty way to try to get back at a foreign government we don't like. (With the leadership of Iran mostly probably not truly caring about the ban in the first place other than taking advantage of the internal propaganda value of it.)

We can talk more about how they got listed the way they did in the first place, but actually implementing the ban this way does not fall under doing so in a way properly designed to limit the riskiest groups from entering as implemented among its other issues. (For good measure, actually admitted Iranian refugees at this point are more likely to either be some of the remaining Iranian Jews or secular inclined individuals who ran afoul of Iran's religious laws and are therefore especially unlikely to end up engaging in religiously motivated terrorism against the US.)
 
My friends family is here visiting from iran. They are now stuck here.
jackstar7 said:
Sorry bigots, you got outed by one of your own again. So arrogant!
Click to expand...
What they are trying to do is plainly obvious. They've even made statements about exceptions for christians from those countries.
 
Aegeon said:
Plainly false in the case of Iranians.

There is not a plausible level of threat from visiting Iranians, at least compared to the far higher threat from Saudi Arabians and the like, where the practical concern for the US would be with Iranian government affiliated individuals if anyone who could be fairly filtered out through vetting if a concern. (An actual Iranian government espionage agent type would simply resort to the expedient of arriving on a visa with a false identity from a country not on the banned list.)

In fact, the average Iranian is a way lower threat profile than the typical Muslim from many other countries in that they are overwhelming Shiite who are enemies of ISIS and Al Qaeda and therefore extremely unlikely to be successfully recruited by these groups. Putting Iranians on the list in particular looks like either a rather arbitrary decision with a poor set of specific justifications behind it or a petty way to try to get back at a foreign government we don't like. (With the leadership of Iran mostly probably not truly caring about the ban in the first place other than taking advantage of the internal propaganda value of it.)

We can talk more about how they got listed the way they did in the first place, but actually implementing the ban this way does not fall under doing so in a way properly designed to limit the riskiest groups from entering as implemented among its other issues. (For good measure, actually admitted Iranian refugees at this point are more likely to either be some of the remaining Iranian Jews or secular inclined individuals who ran afoul of Iran's religious laws and are therefore especially unlikely to end up engaging in religiously motivated terrorism against the US.)
Click to expand...

The ban was implemented by the Obama administration in Dec 2015 and updated in Feb 2016. President Trump had nothing to do with making the list, President Trump simply turned up the existing ban from 10 to 11. If you want to be pissed at the choice of countries then blame Obama, DHS, Congress, etc.
 
AnonymouseUser said:
The ban was implemented by the Obama administration in Dec 2015 and updated in Feb 2016. President Trump had nothing to do with making the list, President Trump simply turned up the existing ban from 10 to 11. If you want to be pissed at the choice of countries then blame Obama, DHS, Congress, etc.
Click to expand...
This is a preposterously dumb argument.

The difference between the new and old policies is indisputably night and day. If Trump can't justify the policy on his own at this point its his problem and responsibility since he could have implemented at least a different one which at least theoretically would come closer to achieving his stated goal for it. (While Congress might be slightly at fault, for at least the moment you can't really blame them that much yet although you could increasingly take issue with more Republicans not strongly criticizing the new policy.
 
Aegeon said:
This is a preposterously dumb argument.

The difference between the new and old policies is indisputably night and day. If Trump can't justify the policy on his own at this point its his problem and responsibility since he could have implemented at least a different one which at least theoretically would come closer to achieving his stated goal for it. (While Congress might be slightly at fault, for at least the moment you can't really blame them that much yet although you could increasingly take issue with more Republicans not strongly criticizing the new policy.
Click to expand...

All they have to do is pass a law that counters it or cut the budget for this move.

They'd rather flap their gums about it though than do their jobs. Party before country right?
 
brycejones said:
You have a point. A more accurate thread title would be:

The ban that fucks over innocent muslims to prevent radical islamist terrorists entering the US that excludes the countries terrorists who have attacked the US actually come from but where Trump has business interests

I hope the OP updates it soon.
Click to expand...

No more innocent than christians that claim to condemn abortion clinic bombings/shootings but believe they (doctors,patients,clinics) had it coming and deserved it but would never pull the trigger themselves.
 
First of all, the thread of this title is false / fake, because Trump isn't banning Muslims. He's banning refugees from specific countries.

Similar threads with similarly false titles have had their topics changed to be more accurate. Don't expect that to happen here because this is P&N and they don't require lefty thread titles to be accurate.

Second, it is 100% legal to deny refugees and immigration from possible sources of terrorism. Jimmy Carter and GWB both did it. Lots of precedence.

Third, the countries on the list are not the largest Muslim countries, they are the ones identified as the most likely to have terrorists mixed with real refugees. Identified that way under Obama. Obama didn't do anything about it, Trump did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: x26
Sunburn74 said:
All they have to do is pass a law that counters it or cut the budget for this move.

They'd rather flap their gums about it though than do their jobs. Party before country right?
Click to expand...
Basically if they block legislation that Democrats are going to propose if the immediate future to block Trump's move this picture is going to change. (I was just noting that especially blaming them right now is still slightly premature, and we should also be able to identify which members of congress to blame if the legislation is not passed.)
 
stormkroe said:
The fact that this is less a muslim ban than it is a right-handed-person ban. I realize that 99% of the news headings say exactly what your title says, but echo quantity doesn't create truth.
Click to expand...
So Rudy says it, but it's not true?

That ain't the media you have an issue with, it's the administration.
 
There is no such thing as an illegal or unconstitutional act. The government has the presumption of correctness which means until a legal challenge nullifies the actions of the other branches and at that time the determination of legality and/or Constitutionality is made. Trump's actions are consequently "legal" until courts say otherwise. I'd suggest recalling Carter's actions regarding citizens of Iran and so Presidents have banned immigrants, but the circumstances are different and so while likely Trumps actions will be struck down it's not certain and no one here can render judgement.
 
brycejones said:
I didn't say Muslim ban...please try again.
Click to expand...
My mistake broseph, when you said 'my title' I automatically assumed we were still talking about this thread title. Your title is pretty accurate (though pretty hyperbolic, right?)

@jackstar7 , what Rudy said may be true, but regardless of what was said over the phone *wink wink, nudge nudge, what actually happened was a ban that is nonspecific to muslims, men, women, volleyball captains or nerds who play shifty rogues on Thursday DnD nights.
 
stormkroe said:
@jackstar7 , what Rudy said may be true, but regardless of what was said over the phone *wink wink, nudge nudge, what actually happened was a ban that is nonspecific to muslims, men, women, volleyball captains or nerds who play shifty rogues on Thursday DnD nights.
Click to expand...

'May' be true? Are you saying you don't believe what he himself said?! This IS a ban on Muslims yet a very rushed one at that. Don't look at Trump admins incompetence as a catch all to their bigotry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top