6 ms·
> First, it's not a "ban". It's a temporary suspension until new vetting procedures are put in place. A 90-day suspension and a ban are the same thing. ban is
by meritt 10y ago
> First, it's not a "ban". It's a temporary suspension until new vetting procedures are put in place.
A 90-day suspension and a ban are the same thing. ban is defined as "officially or legally prohibit." -- duration is irrelevant.
> Second, it's not "Muslim"
The executive order specifically exempts people of minority religions in those countries "prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality".
All of the countries in question have Islam as the primary religion. If it was targeting nationality only, they would not provide an exclusion for minority religions.
The ban is targeting Muslims (and only Muslims) of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.
- refurb 10y agoYou completely failed to address the OP's comment about the largest Muslim countries in the world (Indonesian and Pakistan) not being a part of the ban. If Trump was targeting Muslims, wouldn't he have started there?
- javajosh 10y agoPerhaps because he has business interests there? Pakistan is particularly interesting because the San Bernadino shooters were from there. Saudi Arabia is also not on the list, despite being the home of Wahabist terrorism. I'm totally against the ban, but these inconsistencies are revealing. http://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/nation/2017/01/26/countries-trump-business-interests-spared-immigration-ban/97089420/ http://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/nation/2017/01/26/countr...
- makomk 10y agoThe inconsistent treatment of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is bipartisan and predates Trump's presidency by a long time. Remember how a number of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and their role was basically ignored? How the Saudis donated large sums to the Clinton Foundation? How we've provided large sums of military aid to Pakistan since 2001?
- pcwalton 10y ago> If Trump was targeting Muslims, wouldn't he have started there? He campaigned on a Muslim ban. Why try to randomly guess at his intentions, when he stated them over and over again, clear as day?
- refurb 10y agoLet's focus here. The claim is this is a ban on Muslim's, yet the vast majority of Muslims in the world are unaffected.
- pcwalton 10y agoIt is a partial fulfillment of the goal Trump explicitly stated repeatedly during the campaign: "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the country". He has taken a very large concrete step toward this outcome, explicitly and obviously in service of it. To claim otherwise requires both being obtuse about the wording and the belief that Trump won't do what he said he was going to do. After the events of the past week, the latter claim seems indefensible.
- moomoo2 10y agoThere are a lot of people who will happily accept a temporary suspension of immigration from countries full of ISIS fighters who are trying to exploit our immigration system based on the president's word that the various security services need 90 days to tighten things up. There are a lot of people in this group who also will go out and protest if literally anything more aggressive is done from here (and who also vehemently opposed the original proposal during the campaign.) The slippery slope fallacy falls short.
- pcwalton 10y ago> There are a lot of people in this group who also will go out and protest Trump, of all people, has given no indication at all that his policy decisions will be swayed by protest. > The slippery slope fallacy falls short. It's not a slippery slope when Trump said that a Muslim ban was what he was going to do! It's not "oh, he might bring up banning all Muslims from entering at this rate". He already said he wanted to do that. Explicitly.
- thieving_magpie 10y agoFlipping the question, if it's against extremism then where is Saudi Arabia on the list? How can you invoke 9/11 as your justification and not have Saudi on the list?
- maratd 10y ago> The executive order specifically exempts people of minority religions in those countries I'm sorry, but are you actually upset by a provision that makes an exception for those being actively persecuted because of their religion? Regardless of what you may think of the executive order, I'm not sure how you can find fault in that.
- meritt 10y agoI'm not taking a stance here, I'm using facts to prove that this ban is targeting Muslims (and only Muslims) of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.
- general_ai 10y agoBut not Muslims from the 189 remaining countries. So maybe it's not, in fact, about Islam per se? Do you think there is such a possibility? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
- meritt 10y agoIt's about Muslims (and only Muslims) from the 7 listed countries. I'm not sure how to make this any more clear.