It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Donald Trump refugee ban: 'arrivals from targeted countries stopped at US airports'

page: 8
27
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: stolencar18

Nothing but ignorance in your post. Typical Trump supporter.




posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

Right, so we should ban all guns then, because not doing so would just be accepting more risk, which would be stunningly stupid, right?

I haven't seen squat from this administration about dealing with radicalization. Meanwhile, refugees who have asked to come here are being told "too bad for you - sorry, not sorry".


This is not about guns.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

Creation of safe zones takes time and military action. What do we do for them in the meantime?

You don't know much about Syria do you? There is all ready UN camps for Syrian refuges where do you think the refuges come from? They go to the UN camp then they apply for asylum in the USA. The main camps the US gets refuges from is in Jordan we don't allow people to directly immigrate from Syria to the US. The camps in Jordan are safe and under UN control the only problem is over crowding so the UN is trying to move them into countries quickly.


By the way interesting side note it isn't the US government that actually assists the refuges in settling in. That's actually handled by agencies like Church World Service, Ethiopian Community Development Council, Episcopal Migration Ministries, the Hebrew Immigration Aid Society, International Rescue Committee, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops/Migration and Refugee Services, and World Relief. Ironic how other religions are actively involved in the process yet ive seen many people claim these same religions were trying to prevent it because they aren't Christian etc. .

edit on 1/28/17 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:52 AM
link   
The ban still allows the admittance of ethnic and religious minorities who are in legitimate threat of persecution at the hands of rebels in Syria.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

THERE ARE NO SAFE ZONES FOR THEM TO GO TO!!!!


Yes there are. There are hundreds of locations all across Europe and North Africa.
Many have closed, reopened and closed again, and can easily be reopened.
These camps have been used for 5-6 years, often as detention camps, but could very easily be re-purposed, staffed and supplied by govts around the world.

The solution is quite simple and fast, but requires money.

The optimal solution to the problem is what Trump is fighting for.


edit on 28/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Under Obama administration the screening of refugees now falls under the UNHCR, while the US have one of the most complete and complicating screening process since 9/11 the actions of Obama and the hurry to accept more refugees due to the crisis in Europe and complain of the UN, had opened doors to more fast screenings.

That is a big problem.

In 2015 the Republicans in congress questioned the president screening UN procedures of refugees that comes into the US after the Paris attack.

So yes it was already a concern on the screenings methods lately under Obama

Since 2001 America had accepted over 700,000 refugees into the nation the bulk of that came under Obama administration.

By 2017 Obama had planned to add 100,000 more refugees into the a nation, so if Trump is now is holding back on the amount of refugees coming into the nation, I am very glad he did

I wish people will research on facts rather than just rant about what Trump is doing.




posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

THERE ARE NO SAFE ZONES FOR THEM TO GO TO!!!!



That's too f'n bad, ain't it!?

Why is it the USA's problem?








posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

Right, so we should ban all guns then, because not doing so would just be accepting more risk, which would be stunningly stupid, right?

I haven't seen squat from this administration about dealing with radicalization. Meanwhile, refugees who have asked to come here are being told "too bad for you - sorry, not sorry".


This is not about guns.


Yeah, because you see how the analogy kills your argument.

The fact is, banning innocent Muslim refugees from coming here when they have asked to be here (and go through the extensive refugee vetting process) just because there are bad people in the world somewhere, is like banning innocent people from buying guns because there are bad people out there who will misuse guns. You don't just throw away civil and human rights because of some fear mongering. You do what you can to mitigate the potential damage while allowing for civil and human rights.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

Mostly Christians, one of the groups that Obama when questioned about why is not more Christians refugees he hinted that a question like that was prejudiced.


Barack Obama launched a fierce attack on Republican candidates who argued that Muslim refugees must be kept out of America on Monday, saying: “We do not have religious tests for our compassion.”

The proposals that Christians should be prioritized as refugees from Syria were shameful and un-American, the president told a G20 press conference in southern Turkey.

“When I hear political leaders suggesting that there should be a religious test for admitting which person fleeing which country,” Obama said, “when some of these folks themselves come from other countries, that’s shameful.


www.theguardian.com...



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

THERE ARE NO SAFE ZONES FOR THEM TO GO TO!!!!



That's too f'n bad, ain't it!?

Why is it the USA's problem?







Because we aren't a shi*tty country that doesn't care about human rights. Or at least we weren't. Probably about to change now.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

Right, so we should ban all guns then, because not doing so would just be accepting more risk, which would be stunningly stupid, right?

I haven't seen squat from this administration about dealing with radicalization. Meanwhile, refugees who have asked to come here are being told "too bad for you - sorry, not sorry".


This is not about guns.


Yeah, because you see how the analogy kills your argument.

The fact is, banning innocent Muslim refugees from coming here when they have asked to be here (and go through the extensive refugee vetting process) just because there are bad people in the world somewhere, is like banning innocent people from buying guns because there are bad people out there who will misuse guns. You don't just throw away civil and human rights because of some fear mongering. You do what you can to mitigate the potential damage while allowing for civil and human rights.


It's a different argument and an utterly stupid one to relate to refugees.
Banning refugees until effective vetting is in place is designed to reduce the risk of terrorists entering the country and killing Americans. It is not designed to remove the risk of all eventualities that result in citizens being killed.

Your argument suggests waiting for a non existent silver bullet and in the meantime doing nothing.

Once again your stupidity makes me very glad you are not in any position of power in Govt.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Then let the refugees stay here until these wonderful luxurious camps are reopened.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Maybe they should just evict democrat voters from their homes and use them to house the refugees.

I mean the gated, walled communities and large houses with plenty of space would make good refugee camps.

Sweden was doing that until massive public backlash after all.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

We have effective vetting in place.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

THERE ARE NO SAFE ZONES FOR THEM TO GO TO!!!!



That's too f'n bad, ain't it!?

Why is it the USA's problem?







Because we aren't a shi*tty country that doesn't care about human rights. Or at least we weren't. Probably about to change now.


Neither are many countries across Europe, the ME and Africa.
There are plenty of safe areas. more easily accessible than the US and much closer to home for a return when the troubles end.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

You made a good point about radicalization, but here's the deal.

You allow them to come to the US and here, they have religious freedom which means they build Mosques.

The radicalization begins in the Mosques. The only way to stop radicalization is to stop the proliferation of the Mosques and the only way to stop that is to stop immigration.

Our moral obligation to help refugees can be met by supporting the extant refugee camps with money, food, medical supplies and Doctors as well as security personnel. In that way, they don't need to come to the US.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Evidently the ban will also include green card holders - legal permanent U.S. residents who are not citizens.

www.reuters.com...

Peace.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

We have effective vetting in place.


Nope.
From the EO.


Numerous foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001, including foreign nationals who entered the United States after receiving visitor, student, or employment visas, or who entered through the United States refugee resettlement program.


Your Govt. disagrees.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

Not necessarily true. Much radicalization happens on the internet. And many who are radicalized have suffered bad treatment by society here, which only fuels their flames of discontent.

It's more complicated.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

An executive order is not "the government". Did Congress pass this?



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join