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.

 

Most claims about Trump’s visa Executive Order are false or misleading

page: 3
97
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: FelisOrion

How many Christians applied for refugee status under Obama and were refused?
How many Muslims applied for refugee status under Obama and were refused?

I eagerly await your response and information.
edit on 29-1-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

BS, you are full of it. Now that the provision is out in the open, you are doing damage control. They don't care which sect of Islam is persecuting who, if you are Muslim, you are banned. Period. If you are Christian, you will be considered.

A Spade is a spade.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

??
Trump's EO does not ban travel.
American citizens are free to travel.
Non-citizens will have extra vetting if they are coming from specific countries (determined as the source of terrorism during Obama's administration.)
Green card holders are being vetted and so far all have been admitted. This vetting upon return has been in effect since before the EO and is still in effect. DHS has authority to admit people under the EO and has been.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: FelisOrion

Current immigration law and Trumps EO allow for Muslim refugees. Maybe you should read both, the EO and the laws, before making a false claim about my post.

The only false information so far is the claims in your post. Point out the law and EO where it bans muslims.
edit on 29-1-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: BubbaJoe
Trump didn't just ban refugees, he banned travel. But he left out the country with the most terrorists ties to our country, Saudi, this protects his personal interest, this is or should be an impeachable offense.


And because of this Trump has made his corruption obvious (we knew it was coming). His business ties already have way too much influence. So much for the swamp draining. But we already knew there would be no draining of the swamp after seeing his cabinet picks. Trickle-down swampiness. Yay.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: FelisOrion

Current immigration law and Trumps EO allow for Muslim refugees. Maybe you should read both, the EO and the laws, before making a false claim about my post.

The only false information so far is the claims in your post. Point out the law and EO where it bans muslims.


I have read too much about this, and maybe you and the rest of the Trump supporters need to realize this man is a threat to our freedoms, and a disgrace on the international stage. How many folks will help the US military in Iraq or Syria now that they know what our President ( almost makes me gag) thinks about them.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

Persecuted Muslims are candidates for asylum in the U.S.

Trump's EO is a temporary measure only.

They are reconfiguring the laws in place and adjusting the past administration(s) enforcement level policies.




posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

No they aren't. i have a friend who's family is of Iranian decent. Some of them were born in Iran but immigrated here. They just had to cancel an out-of-the-country vacation as they fear not being allowed to enter back into their own country. This crap is affecting real people. Real Americans.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

Apparently not since you keep making false claims about the EO and immigration law, which neither support your claims.

How about you support your accusations. You are making claims, now please support them with facts.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: BubbaJoe

??
Trump's EO does not ban travel.
American citizens are free to travel.
Non-citizens will have extra vetting if they are coming from specific countries (determined as the source of terrorism during Obama's administration.)
Green card holders are being vetted and so far all have been admitted. This vetting upon return has been in effect since before the EO and is still in effect. DHS has authority to admit people under the EO and has been.



It banned travel from those 7 countries, the tech industry is losing their minds over this. This was not all about refugees, not to mention those that hold green cards to legally live here. Trump is a disaster, and this is only the first week.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: okrian

Iran is a special issue that is separate from the rest. The US and Iran have no diplomatic relations. Iran is labeled as a state sponsor of terror and has said they were sending elite IRGC units to infiltrate the US and EU countries. They have held this label going all the way back to Carter, who also ban all Iranians from coming to the US.

The lack of diplomatic relations severely restricts Iranian travel to the US and vice versa. Iran also blocks all Israelis from visiting Iran, along with 15 other countries.

Are you outraged at that?



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

It did not ban travel for those nations. It temporarily blocked travel and people can still apply for visas and refugee status. The block is 90 days and 120 for refugees. Its in place to revamp the vetting process and policies.

People can request a case by case review.

If the EO / Trump administrations actions were illegal or unconstitutional the federal judges would not have blocked a small part of either. They would have struck down the EO as illegal or unconstitutional. They did not do this because the action s are lawful and constitutional. The judges ruling btw are obama appointees.
edit on 29-1-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Bwhahaha, point out where it bans Muslims. I pointed it out in two sections, but for some reason you believe those two sections were included because Steven Bannon and Trump actually cared about the safety of other minority religions. Are you seriously that naive? It was put there to secure Christians from the ban, and Christians only.

Of course, you are only interpreting the text in its most literal form, and that is what Donald was counting on. But the people who are protesting? The people who are gathered in NYC? The people who are signing those petitions? They, like myself, know the implied meaning behind those provisions.

You can play oblivious lawyer all you want, but the reality is, that provision was put there to guarantee that Christians get considered for refugee status, and Muslims do not. It is essentially a MUSLIM ban. Stop being a coward and own up to it. If it is a Muslim ban, just say it.


edit on 29-1-2017 by FelisOrion because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-1-2017 by FelisOrion because: (no reason given)


+1 more 
posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: FelisOrion

No you cited the 2 sections then added your personal interpretation and are trying to portray it as fact when its anything but.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

And you are doing damage control when its clear that provision was put in place solely to protect Christians (the minority religion) in these countries. Any human with a sense of decency and an ounce of intuition can see that.

Stop being a coward and man up. If it is a Muslim ban; own up to it. But don't sit there and act like that provision was for the protection of OTHER minority religions. That is BS.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 09:07 PM
link   
a reply to: FelisOrion

Its not a Muslim ban. Please educate yourself on the EO and current immigration laws.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Of course it isn't. And 1.8 Million is equal to 250,000.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: FelisOrion

and 220 million is equal to 1.4 billion in your math world also?



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: BubbaJoe

It did not ban travel for those nations. It temporarily blocked travel and people can still apply for visas and refugee status. The block is 90 days and 120 for refugees. Its in place to revamp the vetting process and policies.

People can request a case by case review.

If the EO / Trump administrations actions were illegal or unconstitutional the federal judges would not have blocked a small part of either. They would have struck down the EO as illegal or unconstitutional. They did not do this because the action s are lawful and constitutional. The judges ruling btw are obama appointees.


If I am Iranian, and need to come to the US to see a dying parent, yes it is a ban. You guy have lost this argument, a federal court ruled that it needed to be put down. Why can't you grow up and realize the Orange Messiah is not all that, it is going to be a rough 4 years and his feet, and his supporters will be held to the fire.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

The thing that worries me the most is the misinformed that feeds on the media frenzy chaos

And they are becoming dangerous, mindless and dangerous.



new topics

top topics



 
97
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join