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.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: TonyS
I'm pretty damn confident the loss of opportunity for "Biblical archaeologists" and Egyptology won't erode US competitiveness. If I turn out to be wrong, oopsie... but let's be realistic here, we're not talking about travel bans involving cutting edge technological societies or premierly educated populations.
originally posted by: neo96
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: TonyS
I'm pretty damn confident the loss of opportunity for "Biblical archaeologists" and Egyptology won't erode US competitiveness. If I turn out to be wrong, oopsie... but let's be realistic here, we're not talking about travel bans involving cutting edge technological societies or premierly educated populations.
Terrorists around the middle east have been blowing up archaeological history.
And have done more damage to 'science' that a month of Trump.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Byrd
Curious that we've never heard the same gripes in relation to such places as North Korea, Somalia, decades of travel bans to Iran and Iraq, etc...
but by all means, if scientists are in an uproar, let's put national security and common sense on the backburner.
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Well by libral logic then if the USA had free travel to North Korea we would have cured cancer, have warp drive and robot slaves by now
originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: crazyewok
Not only that but I would think that ISIS would put a bigger cramp on scientific archaeology then Trump ever could .
I hardly think the world of science will ground to a halt because of a travel ban to 7 insignificant, war torn countrys.
originally posted by: Byrd
Do a fact check on all attacks in the US (of whatever size you like) since 2001 and count the number done by immigrants versus the number done by US citizens. Identify which nationalities have been responsible for the most attacks... but you also have to count US citizens. I'll be glad to discuss those statistics with you.
Just last October, an Iraqi refugee living in Texas pleaded guilty to attempting to provide support to the Islamic State group, accused of taking tactical training and wanting to blow himself up in an act of martyrdom. In November, a Somali refugee injured 11 in a car-and-knife attack at Ohio State University, and he surely would have been arrested had he not been killed by an officer.
All told, Kurzman said, 23 percent of Muslim Americans involved with extremist plots since Sept. 11 had family backgrounds from the seven countries.
A review of information compiled by a Senate committee in 2016 reveals that 72 individuals from the seven countries covered in President Trump's vetting executive order have been convicted in terror cases since the 9/11 attacks. These facts stand in stark contrast to the assertions by the Ninth Circuit judges who have blocked the president's order on the basis that there is no evidence showing a risk to the United States in allowing aliens from these seven terror-associated countries to come in.
originally posted by: Byrd
a reply to: burdman30ott6
I'd hoped you might become curious and look into it further.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
originally posted by: Byrd
Do a fact check on all attacks in the US (of whatever size you like) since 2001 and count the number done by immigrants versus the number done by US citizens. Identify which nationalities have been responsible for the most attacks... but you also have to count US citizens. I'll be glad to discuss those statistics with you.
OK, fair enough. Let's start right here...
The judge, James Robart, was correct in his larger point that the deadliest and most high-profile terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11 — like the Boston Marathon bombings and the shootings in Orlando, Florida, and San Bernardino, California — were committed either by U.S. citizens or by people from countries other than the seven majority-Muslim nations named in Trump's order.
They're coming into this country. Our present vetting process has some successes, but also some failures. The only iron clad method of protecting ourselves from this threat is to disallow entrance from countries producing the threats until such time as we can determine a vetting process with a markedly higher success rate.
Personally, I don't believe the ban goes far enough. It should not have stopped at 7 countries. We shouldn't be allowing any travel between the USA and terror producing nations, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, etc.
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Byrd
I am #ing overjoyed and ecstatic a bat# crazy despotic country such as North Korea has fallen behind.
Hell you just put a even better argument forward in isolating Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran to stall there weapons programs!
originally posted by: crazyewok
I hardly think the world of science will ground to a halt because of a travel ban to 7 insignificant, war torn countrys.