Trump's Executive Order - Entry Suspension (aka by MSM as the "Muslim Ban")

[Sean]

Here's the link:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/01/28/case-for-impeachment-the-muslim-ban-fiasco/

Good one from Gordon Duff.
Donald Trump has got to go.

[Cardillac]

I think this goes back to the McClaron (sp?) Act of 1950 signed by president Truman banning all Islamics from the US because they bear an allegience exclusively unto their religion which supercedes any law/statute of the gov't of the country in which they are residing (US gov't doesn't 'yet' do Sharia Law)-

so why wasn't Truman criticized?- because it wasn't much of a problem back then- but it is now in Europe and will become increasingly so in the US if people don't wake up and realize who is really financing all of this (on both continents) and for what purposes-

Gordon Duff should be enjoyed with caution; just because he's a disabled war veteran doesn't mean he's not influenced by negative forces pretending to be "helpfull"-

Goerge Soros (the financer) needs to go, not Trump-

Larry

[DNA]

I've never liked Gordon Duff, and now I consider him a schill for the CIA.
The influx of Muslim refugees in my opinion is being done to destabilize certain countries from within.

[Chester]

I was stimulated to take on this complex subject by reading Target's post #2187 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?90590-Transition-into-Trump&p=1130641&viewfull=1#post1130641) in turiya’s Transition into Trump thread.

Target responded to the heavily spun article from the Daily Mail found here. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4167900/Sir-Mo-Farah-faces-BANNED-returning-America.html)

It is possible that if Sir Mo Farah is traveling under a passport of one of those seven countries, then he could be held up. He may be (and likely is) a British citizen even though I would never trust MSM to be honest about anything. But if he is, he may still be a citizen of Somalia. That, alone, would not cause him to be banned. What would is if he travels under his Somalian passport. I would make odds almost 100% that this was the case with Sir Mo.

I also would make it almost 100% certain all others held up (not allowed to board a plane that is bound for the US, even if just transiting the US) is due to the passenger traveling under a passport from one of those seven countries.

I also make it almost 100% that these are kinks that will be worked out.

But if anyone really wishes to have a serious discussion about this EO (Executive order) then I recommend that they first read the text of the order.


Full text of Trump's executive order on 7-nation ban, refugee suspension (http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/text-of-trump-executive-order-nation-ban-refugees/)

...and just because it matters, it should be understood that it was the Obama administration which created the list -

Obama’s administration made the “Muslim ban” possible and the media won’t tell you (https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/)


I was outraged by the ban on refugees from war-torn countries in the Middle East. I’ve covered refugees fleeing war in Iraq and Syria over the last two years, meeting families on the road in Greece, Serbia and Macedonia, speaking to poor people in Turkey and Jordan and discussing the hopes and fears of people displaced in Iraq. If you want to ban “terrorists,” these are the last people to hit with a refugee ban. Instead the government should be using the best intelligence possible to find people being radicalized, some of whom have lived in the US their whole lives or who come from countries not affected by the ban, such as Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.

So I was outraged, and then I read the executive order. There are many full texts of the order online, such as at CNN, the NYT, the WSJ or Independent. According to most reports Trump was banning “nationals of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States for at least the next 90 days.” This bars people from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. US Senator Elizabeth Warren said “Let’s be clear: A Muslim ban by any other name is still a Muslim ban,” and Senator Chris Murphy claimed “Trump has now handed ISIS a path to rebirth.” Media, such as Vox and the Independent, compared the ban to banning Jews from entry during the Holocaust and bashed Trump for singing the order on Holocaust memorial day. World leaders are “condemning Trump’s Muslim ban,” according to headlines.

I had to see for myself, so I read the executive order. The order does seek “to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States.” It says that it seeks “Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern.” It also says “I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order.” And it targets Syrians specifically. “I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest.”

But, wait a sec. According to the reports “The order bars all people hailing from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.” Critics had attacked Trump for selecting these seven countries and not selecting other states “linked to his sprawling business empire.” Bloomberg and Forbes bought into this.

But, wait a sec. I read the order and Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen are not mentioned in it.

Go back and read it again. Do a “ctrl-f” to find “Iraq”. Where is “Iraq” in the order. It’s not there. Only Syria is there. So where are the seven nations? Where is the “Muslim ban”? It turns out this was a form of fake news, or alternative facts. Trump didn’t select seven “Muslim-majority” countries. US President Barack Obama’s administration selected these seven Muslim-majority countries.

The Department of Homeland Security targeted these seven countries over the last years as countries of concern. In February 2016 “The Department of Homeland Security today announced that it is continuing its implementation of the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 with the addition of Libya, Somalia, and Yemen as three countries of concern, limiting Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals who have traveled to these countries.” It noted “the three additional countries designated today join Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Syria as countries subject to restrictions for Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals.” It was the US policy under Obama to restrict and target people “who have been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited government/military exceptions).” This was text of the US Customs and Border Protection in 2015 relating to “the Visa Waiver Program and Terrorist Travel Protection Act of 2015“. The link even includes the seven nation list in it: “Iraq, Syria, Iran, SUdan, Somalia or Yemen.” And the media knew this back in May 2016 when some civil rights groups complained about it. “These restrictions have provoked an outcry from the Iranian-American community, as well as Arab-American and civil-liberties groups, who say the restrictions on dual nationals and certain travelers are discriminatory and could be imposed against American dual nationals.”

It was signed into law on December 18, 2015, as part of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of FY2016.

[TargeT]

I was stimulated to take on this complex subject by reading Target's post #2187 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?90590-Transition-into-Trump&p=1130641&viewfull=1#post1130641) in turiya’s Transition into Trump thread.

Target responded to the heavily spun article from the Daily Mail

I've found that any major headline with serious "circulation" is almost solely meant to manipulate the "reader/viewer" and, most likely hinting at if not out right stating, the complete opposite of the truth.

It seems simplistic, but it's worked for the last 10 years or so I've applied it to the MSM.


This is another great example... I didn't even read the original text (I should have, no excuse) but just applied this formula... now reading what Sam posted,, it worked again ;)

[Chester]

International Travel and Legal Entry reality (based on my experiences and/or experiences of others who shared with me their first hand experience) - Example 1.

This story comes from my own experience back in 2012. At that time, I had just moved back to the US from where I had lived (as a legal resident) for the prior 5 years, Panama. At the time I lived in Panama, I also obtained legal residency for my wife, Cristina, a Colombian national who had never yet traveled to the US and did not have a US Visa. Our routine was that Cristina would spend 5 or 6 weeks with me in Panama and spend 7 or 8 weeks back in Medellin with her daughter (from another relationship) who was attending "colegio" (equivalent to US high school).

In August of 2012 I received a contract for a project located in Costa Rica. Under Costa Rica's laws, I, as someone traveling under a US Passport, was allowed entry into Costa Rica for 90 days. This meant that unless I had begun the process of obtaining residency and was granted an stay extension, I would have to leave the country prior to my 90 day limit. If I did not, I would be illegal in Costa Rica. If I then left Costa Rica where I went through Costa Rica's "documentation check" I would have been flagged, maybe fined, but also would be barred from returning to Costa Rica for likely 5 years (their standard).

So in late October, approaching my 90 day limit, I chose to fly to Medellin, Colombia to visit my wife. Under the Costa Rica law, all I had to do was be out of Costa Rica for three days and I would be able to return for another 90 day period. I was fortunate that the contractor understood this necessity, allowed me the three days off and paid for my flight. The best part of all was that I would be able to be with Cristina and step daughter, Alejandra for three days.

When the three days were up, we all went to the airport to see me off. This is when I was informed by the agent that worked for Copa Airlines (the airline I was traveling on) that I would not be allowed to travel to Costa Rica because I did not have proof that I had a Yellow Fever vaccine. No one ever told me I needed that. The travel agent in Costa Rica that helped me obtain my ticket never said a word. Of course, its not their responsibility to do so but it would have been nice. So anyways, the agent at the Copa counter also told me that if I did not actually have the vaccine I would need to get it and that I would need to wait 10 days before I would be allowed to travel!

Real life - real issues - real fear (that if I could not travel I might lose my contract) - real fear that the funds I traveled with would not last 10 days...

And then, we called folks we knew in Medellin. One of them suggested we go to a certain hospital where, if we explain the situation, they might "provide me" with the all important "Certificado Internacional de Vacunacion" and perhaps back date it 10 days. I was lucky and unlucky. I still had to get the shot, but the nurse kindly back dated the card. I was able to travel the next day and I didn't lose my contract. It did cost me additional funds at a time I was living extremely lean.

Now why did I share this story? Because this is an example of the reality folks face when traveling internationally. There are all sorts of rules, regulations, interpretations of those regulations and... in some cases, you might get a break here or there.

How this relates to the issues generated by this EO, there has always been a great deal of rules and regs, interpretations of those regs and the most nebulous aspect of the whole experience - whims of the human beings an international traveler encounters regardless of their passport country, their papers, their story which can cause problems with entry and/or cause difficulties with status and compliance once a foreigner has entered a country. THIS is reality and this is nothing new. Trump's EO is just another set of rules and regs which will be interpretted and enforced by human beings who are famous for their own interpretations and decision overrides.

The order should never have been called a "ban" IMO. It should have been called exactly what it is, a suspension of entry rights dependent on an individual's particular circumstances while a review process occurs where it is likely we will see better vetting processes implemented.

If one steps back and considers politics and human beings, there would be far more outrage if the next nightclub massacre occurred in the US and Trump had not begun to act. Again, the EO is temporary and will be replaced by a better process. Even when this happens, there will still be problems. But at least a US administration is now dealing with the problems. From my POV, thank goodness the politicians have been pushed aside and actions are finally coming forth.

Just like Trump beats the drum of "fair trade" - this is a drum as well... a drum known as "equitable immigration policy and enforcement."

Almost all other countries are equal or more restrictive than the US policies which are currently law. In those cases, I know no other country that is anywhere as lax as the US has been in enforcing their immigration laws.

Countries with policies and laws that are more lax than the US laws (just look at Germany) have greatly regretted their actions and it will likely result in the end of Merkle as just one example.

I will soon share Example 2 - a personal story of immigration. A story that has several parts (2a, 2b, 2c, etc.) It will be honest as I strive to be in all my posts when sharing personal experience and opinion.

[Sean]

I think this goes back to the McClaron (sp?) Act of 1950 signed by president Truman banning all Islamics from the US because they bear an allegience exclusively unto their religion which supercedes any law/statute of the gov't of the country in which they are residing (US gov't doesn't 'yet' do Sharia Law)-

so why wasn't Truman criticized?- because it wasn't much of a problem back then- but it is now in Europe and will become increasingly so in the US if people don't wake up and realize who is really financing all of this (on both continents) and for what purposes-

Gordon Duff should be enjoyed with caution; just because he's a disabled war veteran doesn't mean he's not influenced by negative forces pretending to be "helpfull"-

Goerge Soros (the financer) needs to go, not Trump-

Larry

Agree about Gordon(although I don't think him some kind of disinfo agent, or shill). His word isn't gospel, but I agree with him on Trump.

By the way:Trump put Steve Bannon on the NSC, and essentially removed the joint chiefs/DNI from same. That is not good. I think impeaching Trump, or invoking the 25th amendment to remove him, is necessary, even urgent. YMMV.

[Cardillac]

@TargeT

"I've found that any major headline with serious "circulation" is almost solely meant to manipulate the "reader/viewer" and, most likely hinting at if not out right stating, the complete opposite of the truth"-

I couldn't agree with you more-

please continue to be well-

Larry

[ghostrider]

We are seeing an all out war for the contol of the thinking/perceptions of mankind ... it rolls at a furious pace , with division as the end game behind the wizards curtain ... I see one group wanting to stop radical islam from coming into America, another group wanting anyone who wants in to be allowed in ... there has to be a way to end all the division and hate , and people losing their minds ... its a dangerous road we travel ...oh how I long for peace , Love and harmony across the world ...

[enigma3]

The people who are to be kept out by the Trumpster would cut your head off just as easily as breathing. Those to whom violence is a valid way of life. It is only a 4 month ban. During that time the present US government will attempt to establish a vetting procedure that is actually that. As things are now I would keep out all unmarried male Muslims between the ages of 15 to 55 until we can vet people properly. And that may be just a pipe dream. But we have to try. If you have been married for a few years (no marriages of convenience) or have a guaranteed good paying job, come on in. Otherwise we are going to be cautious.

The other thing that is not discussed enough is the jobs problem. Say you have an open border policy that lets anyone in. Where are the jobs?? 95 million people are jobless with no hope of landing a decent job. And you want to let in more? A jobless refugee is much easier to radicalize. Add the disappearance of the majority of middle class and lower class jobs over the next 10 years (mabye 5) due to robots and you now have Baltimore on steroids. No thank you.

Also the question must be asked how many Muslims from war torn countries really want to emigrate? We have incited the conflict in all these countries. We have forced these people to find another country just to get one night of peace. So we create the problem, Soros pays for the boats and we end up with thousands of jobless male Muslims who think Sharia law is the cats meow. I have read report after report stating that the vast majority of these refugees have no intention to integrate into society, have no respect for that country's laws or culture, and are as holier than thou as is possible. Just look at what happened to the Bahai faith in Iran. Disgusting.

The blatantly hypocritical aspect of all this is that refugees from Saudi Arabia are not included. WTF?? Now THAT is pure hypocrisy there Donald. The one Muslim country in the middle east that loves to export violence more than any other and they are free to enter? That is the first country that would be on my list.

It will take some mighty fine predictive policing to determine who has a propensity for violence. Israel can help us out there. They are good at that. In the mean time it is best to err on the side of caution.

[Cardillac]

@Sean

in my humble, cheap opinion Trump has been appointing fellow rich bastards because they, because of their wealth, cannot be bribed financially- unlike the Rothschilds/Rockefellers/Carnegies, etc. I can only hope these 'lower' rich bastards may truly have a heart for humanity and want to share their wealth to a certain extent;

if Trump is legitimate we can only hope he will drain the swamp (although he seems to be a slave of Israel so far)-

in my humble, cheap opinion all refugies need to be sctutinized to the nth-degree to determine if they want freedom/or manipulated victims or a paid future to advance their very agressive religion-

we need to sctrutinze this concept, be very critical of it and deal with it accordingly-

Larry

[abmqa]

The people who are to be kept out by the Trumpster would cut your head off just as easily as breathing. Those to whom violence is a valid way of life. It is only a 4 month ban. During that time the present US government will attempt to establish a vetting procedure that is actually that. As things are now I would keep out all unmarried male Muslims between the ages of 15 to 55 until we can vet people properly. And that may be just a pipe dream. But we have to try. If you have been married for a few years (no marriages of convenience) or have a guaranteed good paying job, come on in. Otherwise we are going to be cautious.

It would be more accurate to say some of the people who are to be kept out by the Trumpster would cut your head off just as easily as breathing.

Many of the people affected are Christians fleeing persecution. Woman and children. I am not certain that America would be a good place for the refugees considering the current political and social climate. Also I feel that it makes more sense for them to settle closer to their homeland, if possible, for ease of acclimation and return to homeland should things change enough to allow for the safe repatriation...

[Cardillac]

@enigma3

very incitefull posting;

when will all of us wake up and finally realize our reality is being dictated in many ways/fronts by a global cabal that wants our souls/money in exchange for their many manipulations?

Larry

[DebJoy]

When my family came to the USA from Canada, you know that 1st-world country to the north, it took 2 years to get approval, and medical exams for all members of the family had to be passed, and USA job and income verification was done. Now, if there are holes in our formal immigration policy with other countries, it would make sense to put a TEMPORARY HALT until you can review such policies. After all, it would only mean 2 years and 4 months for the approval - actually I'm kidding - I know there's some very quick approvals that happen and those should definitely be reviewed in face of the FACTS staring us straight in the face, as mentioned by others.

[Patient]

We are seeing an all out war for the contol of the thinking/perceptions of mankind ... it rolls at a furious pace , with division as the end game behind the wizards curtain ... I see one group wanting to stop radical islam from coming into America, another group wanting anyone who wants in to be allowed in ... there has to be a way to end all the division and hate , and people losing their minds ... its a dangerous road we travel ...oh how I long for peace , Love and harmony across the world ...

It pains me to post this, as I never in all my life thought that I would live through something like this in my own home. I have been raised to accept all people of the world and always have, yet I have never experienced anything like I am living through currently. My hope is that this is a bad dream. Please do not think that I am a racist or anything like that - this hurts me to my soul because just like Whitelove, I have always tried to love all people unconditionally as best as I could.

Ghost rider, my fear is that it is bigger than just the USA. Look at the difficulties recently seen in France and Britain due to the migration of Muslim populations. I personally live in a Muslim neighborhood in Canada - my wife and daughter have both been the target of Muslim kids throwing stones at them. I had to pull my kids from the public school that was primarily Muslim due to all kinds of problems. The neighbors have tried to have the city remove my pets as they do not seem to like dogs. The city was so overwhelmed with false complaints that we were forced to trial to defend ourselves but it was thrown out due to the allegations having no evidence of truth. Now our prime minister is saying that he will allow more Muslims in.
My fear is that this is a world wide problem to bring instability everywhere until we all collapse in upon ourselves in chaos.

[TargeT]

Please do not think that I am a racist or anything like that

Don't worry, you're not racist (Islam is not a race, but a religion) and your not even a Bigot.. you are .. uhmm. (labels are limiting, so ihate to label, but for piece of mind and clarity) a cultralist.

You have recognized that the western and middle eastern cultures do not mix well as there are strong fundamental differences which cause serious conflict & no current bridging methods to resolve these.



my fear is that it is bigger than just the USA...... Now our prime minister is saying that he will allow more Muslims in.
My fear is that this is a world wide problem to bring instability everywhere until we all collapse in upon ourselves in chaos.

This is the ultimate goal,, the ultimate Hegelian dialectic; and where we are "intended" to be heading by those squatting on top.


http://www.cuttingedge.org/ahpimages/Order-Out-of-Chaos.jpg

http://gnosticwarrior.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ordo-ab-chao-1.jpg

They aren't even trying to hide it.

They will implode the east and the west, and sweep it all up into the dustpan of Globalism.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

so why wasn't Truman criticized?- because it wasn't much of a problem back then- but it is now in Europe and will become increasingly so in the US if people don't wake up and realize who is really financing all of this (on both continents) and for what purposes

The financing is the big clue. It's people like George Soros, who literally helped the Nazis round up fellow Jews as a boy, and made his career breaking countries' economies, that is trying to destroy nations by filling them with immigrants that then become powerful voting blocks to override traditional values.

If the traditional values of these Muslim countries were so great they wouldn't be fleeing to America in the first place.

The United States is a country, not the world's largest homeless shelter. Foreigners do not have the right to come over here on their own terms. It is a very generous privilege that the left has abused to erode our values and push us towards Marxist globalism like what you see in China and increasingly in Europe.

[OMG]

Trump's not going to be impeached over Muslim's. Every rational American, and a growing number of countries throughout the world, know exactly what the Muslim paradigm/hierarchy is trying to do.

This isn't a freedom of religion issue. This is WAR based on a Muslim political and genocide movement under the guise of "freedom of religion". It doesn't matter if most Muslims are peaceful or oblivious. Their leaders know exactly what they are doing and as we know from history with most corrupt groups the few control the many.



http://i.imgur.com/8zOEaS3.jpg

[NancyV]

I totally agree with you, OMG. I'm sick and tired of politically correct and/or ignorant people ignoring the dangers of the Muslim RELIGION. They are so afraid of being labeled as against religious freedom they will not see the truth. I'm all for religious freedom, but when a religion is as depraved and dangerous as Islam, then I tell it like I see it. They apparently have not given up on their desire to conquer and subjugate the rest of the world. They are very patient and have been working towards this for centuries.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

And to be clear about this it is not a ban on all Muslims entering the US.

Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, and many other Muslim-majority countries aren't touched by Trump's executive order.

The countries included in the ban list were countries identified by the Obama administration as countries where terrorism was a particular problem.

[boolacalaca]

Once again, for some reason, you can't expect "progressives" or their demi-god George Soros to be consistent:
http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/01/29/flashback-obama-2011-suspended-iraq-refugee-program-six-months-terrorism-fears/

"Amid the furor over President Donald Trump’s executive order temporarily halting refugees while the government can revamp its flawed screening process, it may be instructive to recall that President Obama in 2011 reportedly quietly suspended the Iraq refugee program for six months over terrorism fears.

In 2013, ABC News first revealed that two years earlier, the State Department had imposed a freeze over the processing of Iraqi refugees for six months. The halt was the result of the discovery of two al-Qaida members admitted as refugees from Iraq who were living in Bowling Green, Kentucky and who had admitted to targeting U.S. troops in Iraq.

The network also cited FBI agents conceding that “several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees.”

ABC News reported on the six month refugee freeze (emphasis added):

As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets."

[Eram]

IMO, This discussion is not at all about yes or no letting people from certain countries enter the US.

It is about trying to boycot and downplay Trumps claim on presidency in every way imaginable.
The establishment hates him because he is a nationalist who has already revoked the TPP investors interest deal.
He is bringing their precious project for a NWO to a staggering halt.

Where was the protest when the Obummer administration halted Iraq refugees from entering the US in 2011?

Why are we protesting the Muslim ban and not the US is bombing of 7 Muslim nations at the same time, most of which started under the Obummer admin?

[Sean]

I just attended a protest in battery park, NYC.

I saw people of all races, religions, genders, sexual orientation come together against this ban. It IS a ban. Just because they didn't ban all Muslims everywhere right off doesn't make it any less of a ban. Its unconstitutional, illegal, wrong, stupid, and ineffective.

Its not about being liberal, or progressive, or whatever label. Its about being human. Being American. Being in New York, its a little tough to look lady liberty in the face and NOT uphold what she stands for. That's why the protests at JFK airport last night sparked this national wildfire of protest vs these EO's. This was organic. This was not just Soros pulling strings. The people of NY and local pols were all over this, no "help" required.

When I see all the right-wing talking points people are posting in this thread, all I see is fear. We'll just have to agree to disagree..

[Flash]

North American do not understand what fundamentalist Islam is about, but zero understanding - Most Europeans of christian origins do not either, albeit they are much more aware than American, being constantly exposed lately.

Muslims will not tell you, ever, because it would betray their religious beliefs and their communities (which are not ours), but they all, all of them, know what Islam is about and what duties they have if true believers, as well as what Jihad is about.

My daughter walked with women against Trump, and I told her I disagree with her. That Trump is part of a legitimate election backed by a military soft coup in my views (all in all completely American for the American) and it was needed to avoid a 3rd world war if it had been Clinton as president.

Second, it is pretty much the first time I see ANY politician doing what he said he would do while campaigning, right off the bat.

Third, the ban is temporary, 4 months is nothing to study policies, and it is not banning all Muslims, just those from countries having a large fundamentalist background.

This president needs support, because he may do good, but he is not given any chance and a whole lot of people are literally media brainwashed, including my daughter.


I just attended a protest in battery park, NYC.

I saw people of all races, religions, genders, sexual orientation come together against this ban. It IS a ban. Just because they didn't ban all Muslims everywhere right off doesn't make it any less of a ban. Its unconstitutional, illegal, wrong, stupid, and ineffective.

Its not about being liberal, or progressive, or whatever label. Its about being human. Being American. Being in New York, its a little tough to look lady liberty in the face and NOT uphold what she stands for. That's why the protests at JFK airport last night sparked this national wildfire of protest vs these EO's. This was organic. This was not just Soros pulling strings. The people of NY and local pols were all over this, no "help" required.

When I see all the right-wing talking points people are posting in this thread, all I see is fear. We'll just have to agree to disagree..

[Eram]

Just because they didn't ban all Muslims everywhere right off doesn't make it any less of a ban. Its unconstitutional, illegal, wrong, stupid, and ineffective.

I fully agree Sean,

Yet, this is not what it is all about on the level of politics nationwide and global wide.

The left is being manipulated as a tool for outrage against Trump.
Not because the money master are so concerned about freedom of religion and the faith of refugees.
If this were the case, they would have blown the whistle on Obummer many years ago.

They are concerned about their own interest and grasp at every straw they can find to damage Trump.

You should do well to keep this in mind when you lend your energy to this movement.

I'm not a fan of many things Trump is Trumping, but there are other stakes in play here that perhaps transcend individual events.

[Innocent Warrior]

If Trump has violated US statutes, as the article Sean posted states, then the concerns are valid, whether you agree with the temporary ban or not.

[Eram]

North American do not understand what fundamentalist Islam is about, but zero understanding - Most Europeans of christian origins do not either, albeit they are much more aware than American, being constantly exposed lately.

Muslims will not tell you, ever, because it would betray their religious beliefs and their communities (which are not ours), but they all, all of them, know what Islam is about and what duties they have if true believers, as well as what Jihad is about.

My daughter walked with women against Trump, and I told her I disagree with her. That Trump is part of a legitimate election backed by a military soft coup in my views (all in all completely American for the American) and it was needed to avoid a 3rd world war if it had been Clinton as president.

Second, it is pretty much the first time I see ANY politician doing what he said he would do while campaigning, right off the bat.

Third, the ban is temporary, 4 months is nothing to study policies, and it is not banning all Muslims, just those from countries having a large fundamentalist background.

This president needs support, because he may do good, but he is not given any chance and a whole lot of people are literally media brainwashed, including my daughter.



I am by no means an expert on the Koran, but I'm fairly sure that Mohammed advocates his followers to spread Islam by means of the sword.
This would set Islam apart from many other religions and maybe even put it at the same level of danger as Judaism, which says that their people are the chosen ones.

[Bill Ryan]

I am by no means an expert on the Koran, but I'm fairly sure that Mohammed advocates his followers to spread Islam by means of the sword.


This might be helpful: (do read this!)


http://answering-islam.org/Terrorism/by_the_sword.html

I'm not an expert at ALL (either!) — but I thought maybe I should look it up. It took perhaps 30 seconds to find, and 2-3 minutes to scan.

(By the way, do spell Muhammad correctly! That's easy to look up, as well. Just a matter of respect and care, and takes little trouble.)

An important personal note: all I'm interested in here is accuracy. It's pretty important, when feelings are running high. Fact-checking is even more valuable than expressing emotions. Sometimes (but of course not always), that's easy to do.

I should also say that regarding my personal opinions, based on what I believe I know, I fully support Flash's post above (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?p=1130771#post1130771). (One of the key words there is 'fundamentalist', of course.)

[DNA]

Here is a piece done by a leftist broadcasting station talking about Muslim Norwegian citizens, leftist reporters talking about how they can't believe how horribly muslim women are treated. This piece is specializing on how Muslim immigrants in Norway who are now citizens don't allow their daughters and wives to become Norway citizens, so as to keep those women from having full rights, and as such these women can be used and traded like livestock. These leftist reporters talk about how their views of tolerance were shattered over the horrors these Muslim people inflict on their very own women in their very own family.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_qJae_4qAg
g_qJae_4qAg
My point here is this, if Muslims treat their own women this horribly, how do you think they are going to treat the women of YOUR country.
Rather than post a bunch of articles about Muslims gang raping women in their new host countries, of which there are a lot of these news articles and videos I'm going to switch speeds and go a different direction.


If you folks take it for granted that you know who the Bilderbergers, The Tri-Lateral Commission and the bankers who are attempting a new world order are you can thank Dr. John Coleman. David Icke and Alex Jones both owe their knowledge base to this man. Dr. John Coleman wrote back in 1992 what the New World Order agenda was, and he was correct to a T. He stated that the agenda would be put in place by the leftist parties of the United States. Everything Coleman stated was going to be done by the leftist party to destroy the Middle-Class of America has been 100% spot on.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRqx1YgIBMw&t=2s
rRqx1YgIBMw


The Muslim Trojan Horse is obvious to me, probably because of the Billy Meier prophecies.
Meier states that all of Europe would be destroyed from within by Muslim extremists. This would cause WWIII, dude wrote this back in 1975. I could never understand that prediction before these current events but it is pretty obvious now.

[enigma3]

Good overview on Islam Bill. Muhammad was a prophet. He had an interesting life. His early writings reflect a peaceful man. His later writings become more bellicose with time. Too bad the radicals seem to be ruling the day now.

[Innocent Warrior]

Bill Worte -

An important personal note: all I'm interested in here is accuracy. It's pretty important, when feelings are running high.

Probably the most important point on the whole thread.

I'm worried about you guys in the US, the tensions are so high on a number of highly divisive issues. I don't want to see Trump impeached, I want to see him get a fair go and do well but I hope he doesn't go at it like a bull in a china shop.

It's more important to be peaceful and safe than to be right or wrong or left or right. There's a lot of anger and fighting, I hope we see more of Americans listening to each other and taking care of each other despite differing views.

Keep the children in mind, when protesting at airports remember children can't avoid the airport like they can the parks, be careful what you say, no swearing and don't scare them.

Update - Sorry this post is a bit preachy (preachy about preaching lol), it's just that the controllers are totally nailing it on the whole divide and conquer aspect atm. When there are hundreds of angry people shouting "**** the wall we'll tear it down" at a place where it's not so easy to change plans to avoid the protests, it appears emotions are getting the better of people.

[Helene West]

We are seeing an all out war for the contol of the thinking/perceptions of mankind ... it rolls at a furious pace , with division as the end game behind the wizards curtain ... I see one group wanting to stop radical islam from coming into America, another group wanting anyone who wants in to be allowed in ... there has to be a way to end all the division and hate , and people losing their minds ... its a dangerous road we travel ...oh how I long for peace , Love and harmony across the world ...

It pains me to post this, as I never in all my life thought that I would live through something like this in my own home. I have been raised to accept all people of the world and always have, yet I have never experienced anything like I am living through currently. My hope is that this is a bad dream. Please do not think that I am a racist or anything like that - this hurts me to my soul because just like Whitelove, I have always tried to love all people unconditionally as best as I could.

Ghost rider, my fear is that it is bigger than just the USA. Look at the difficulties recently seen in France and Britain due to the migration of Muslim populations. I personally live in a Muslim neighborhood in Canada - my wife and daughter have both been the target of Muslim kids throwing stones at them. I had to pull my kids from the public school that was primarily Muslim due to all kinds of problems. The neighbors have tried to have the city remove my pets as they do not seem to like dogs. The city was so overwhelmed with false complaints that we were forced to trial to defend ourselves but it was thrown out due to the allegations having no evidence of truth. Now our prime minister is saying that he will allow more Muslims in.
My fear is that this is a world wide problem to bring instability everywhere until we all collapse in upon ourselves in chaos.

Patient

I really feel for you and hope your situation has improved. Liberal whites should all be made to live where you do.

But I also get so mad hearing people like you say, "... I have always tried to love all people unconditionally as best as I could."
My God, when will whites stop this self-destructive nonsense!

DEBRIEFING FROM NEW AGE MIND CONTROL 101:
- It is not normal to love everybody.
-Unconditional love is not unattainable except for prophets and saints. Even parents hate their own kids sometimes. Unless you're God or Jesus, STOP IT...
-Stop worrying about being racist. You didn't hurt anyone, you are far from 'privileged', you are not responsible for anyone else's behavior living or dead, you are not responsible for historical events or current events.

This New Age love trip was a deliberate strategy probably created out of Tavistock or one of the ruling class think tanks to undermine middle class caucasians for the purpose of making them doubt themselves, doubt their common sense, their intuition and most of all - disable their survival instincts - so every white country can be prepped for no human rights and third world living standards. They can't have their one world order with a white middle class who believes their human rights come from God. You are not nuts, it is happening before your eyes.

When you say to Ghostrider - ".. Ghost rider, my fear is that it is bigger than just the USA." That is your God given intelligence, survival instincts and intuition which brainwashing (New Age Love Everyone garbage) seeks to override. Many christians have unfortunately misinterpreted christianity and are making themselves victims with the 'love those who persecute you' and all that jazz...

What comes after throwing rocks at your children? If you want to get rid of the horrible feeling of victimization, you need to divest yourself of the 'love everyone' horse manure.. You will feel more free than you ever have...

You can pray for world peace or who and whatever you want but loving everybody is a BIG JOKE that has been perpetrated on us and the ruling class are laughing their heads off.

Don't forget you are part of the 'everybody' you keep trying to love and wasting energy on people that hate you is not only not loving yourself - you're not teaching your children self-respect, self-love or to have good survival instincts.

As I've tried to say before, a famous shepherd once told his flock "Do not cast pearls before swine". he loved his flock and didn't want them to be stupid, dumb sheep.

[7alon]

I just attended a protest in battery park, NYC.

I saw people of all races, religions, genders, sexual orientation come together against this ban. It IS a ban. Just because they didn't ban all Muslims everywhere right off doesn't make it any less of a ban. Its unconstitutional, illegal, wrong, stupid, and ineffective.

Its not about being liberal, or progressive, or whatever label. Its about being human. Being American. Being in New York, its a little tough to look lady liberty in the face and NOT uphold what she stands for. That's why the protests at JFK airport last night sparked this national wildfire of protest vs these EO's. This was organic. This was not just Soros pulling strings. The people of NY and local pols were all over this, no "help" required.

When I see all the right-wing talking points people are posting in this thread, all I see is fear. We'll just have to agree to disagree..

As far as I am aware, it isn't unconstitutional to ban people from other countries who are not currently residing in America, from immigrating or visiting America.

[WildOrchid]

I just attended a protest in battery park, NYC.
I saw people of all races, religions, genders, sexual orientation come together against this ban. It IS a ban. Just because they didn't ban all Muslims everywhere right off doesn't make it any less of a ban. Its unconstitutional, illegal, wrong, stupid, and ineffective.

Its not about being liberal, or progressive, or whatever label. Its about being human. Being American. Being in New York, its a little tough to look lady liberty in the face and NOT uphold what she stands for. That's why the protests at JFK airport last night sparked this national wildfire of protest vs these EO's. This was organic. This was not just Soros pulling strings. The people of NY and local pols were all over this, no "help" required.

When I see all the right-wing talking points people are posting in this thread, all I see is fear. We'll just have to agree to disagree..


"Treat others as you would want them to treat you"
Obama was in office for 8 years with the result of more wars, the USA divided and trillions more in debt! How come no one shouted "impeachment" there? Now there is a new pres, he's been in office for only 8 days and some already shout "impeach him!". Seriously, give Trump a chance, or how would you feel if you started a new job and after only 8 days your work colleges demanded you be fired?


As for the "Muslim Ban" hyper hysteria:
Has anyone actually read read the bill that was signed? Last time I looked it said: "An executive order calling for heightened vetting of certain foreign nationals seeking entry into the United States. The order temporarily suspends entry by the nationals of seven Muslim-majority countries: Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. It is to last for 90 days, while heightened vetting procedures are developed." In other words it is a temporary measure while heightened vetting procedures are being developed. Read more at...
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444371/donald-trump-executive-order-ban-entry-seven-muslim-majority-countries-legal
http://www.infowars.com/video-the-truth-about-trumps-muslim-ban/http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444371/donald-trump-executive-order-ban-entry-seven-muslim-majority-countries-legal
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/25/executive-order-border-security-and-immigration-enforcement-improvements

And as for immigration vetting procedures:
Have any of you ever immigrated into this or some other country? I have. I am quite familiar with the US vetting procedures because I went trough them. A lot of personal info is collected. They wanted to know my religion, if I have a criminal record, if I am involved in terrorism, criminal activities, communism, prostitution etc. I even had to supply x-rays of my chest to ensure I was not ill. Did I find that "raciest", "discriminative" or some other kind of imaginary "bigotry"? NO I DID NOT! It seemed common sense to me that to be guest of an other country one would be required to respect it's law and culture. One has to earn the right to be welcomed as a guest. And if one does not like a country's laws or culture, then don't go there and don't expect to get invited. Vetting procedures are not exclusive to the USA. Google immigration requirements of some other countries and see for yourself. I have lived in 4 different countries, 3 of them as a guest and they all, including my birth country, had vetting procedures for different types of immigrants.

So maybe, just maybe.... a little reading and studying, a walk in the park contemplating and looking at the bigger picture might help calm matters down a little. :sun:

[Eram]

I am by no means an expert on the Koran, but I'm fairly sure that Mohammed advocates his followers to spread Islam by means of the sword.


This might be helpful: (do read this!)


http://answering-islam.org/Terrorism/by_the_sword.html

I'm not an expert at ALL (either!) — but I thought maybe I should look it up. It took perhaps 30 seconds to find, and 2-3 minutes to scan.

(By the way, do spell Muhammad correctly! That's easy to look up, as well. Just a matter of respect and care, and takes little trouble.)

An important personal note: all I'm interested in here is accuracy. It's pretty important, when feelings are running high. Fact-checking is even more valuable than expressing emotions. Sometimes (but of course not always), that's easy to do.

I should also say that regarding my personal opinions, based on what I believe I know, I fully support Flash's post above (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?p=1130771#post1130771). (One of the key words there is 'fundamentalist', of course.)

Thanks Bill and I do admit not to have acted carefully enough with my post.
Especially in the light of the emotions running high and the high stakes of the mater at hand, I should have.

I was not pointing to jihad only though, but rather a conversation that I watched between Cenk uygur (young Turks) and Sam Harris in which Harris points out that a chore doctrine of the Koran is spreading Islam to the ends of the world by means of conquest (Just as Muhammad was a man of conquest by the sword) and not so much by means of conversation.
Harris is convinced, based on his studies that among the major religions, Islam is the easiest one to find a message of violence. Martyrdom, spreading Islam by means of violence... etc

Starting at min. 1:50

WlAflFRpeZw

The whole conversation can be watched here (highly recommended):
WVl3BJoEoAU

In General Harris concludes that purely based on the books by which religions build their faith around, the Koran is the one by far that promotes violence.

Having said that, I have not studied that Koran, so I rely on the word of authority here (Sam Harris), which is often a slippery slope.

[James Newell]

All this must get rid of trump when he is doing some of the best work ANY president in recent history has done.
Seriously when do you remember a politician actually doing what he promised he would do? And in the first week in office, its frigging amazing. Plus he is doing it for no pay, and actually has his cabinet not collecting a paycheck.

Also the way the media spins every little thing is just showing how bad they are as info sources.

And just last year an exec order was written almost word for word on what Obama signed onto a year or so ago for a few months re the same countries President Trump just banned and not one peep from the press.

President Trump go go go and stay safe in your attempt to turn this mess around. The odds are against him that he can.

http://www.infowars.com/epic-is-team-trump-baiting-liberal-media-and-refugee-protesters-by-using-obamas-own-policy/

[Patient]

I have an open mind. I wish I could love everyone unconditionally. I will also be open to be a friend to someone before being their enemy. They can have their beliefs and I will give all people and cultures a fair opportunity and not pre-judge. That is what I mean about unconditional. I am not walking in the streets with my arms open wide while people spit at me.

It hurts me that I am made to feel anger towards someone because they are stupid. I have done nothing but lived with my family as best I can. So they throw rocks at my family - and to be honest they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. If I was to throw back, I would connect and hurt them - they would deserve it - but then I would end up being the bad guy and probably get charged and be made out to be a racist in the local paper. So, now I have to move away to avoid this crap? Not fair. They probably left their country because they didn't like the way things were and then they bring their crap with them to us.

Helene West, I thank you for your feedback. I wrote that previous post with a lot of emotion. Thank you for balancing it out for other people to read it through and help me get my message out better. Although I wish I could love all people unconditionally, it is a wish and a starting point when I meet people. It rarely lasts long. I also do not want to be pushed into a fight that I don't deserve. I have faught off black bears more than once with only a wooden staff. Most of my children are physically trained and could easily clear the street if necessary. But my point is that we shouldn't have to. Especially when our own government is stoking the fire - time for change.

If people want to move to a new country, that is their choice but they should be made to adopt the lifestyle and values of that country. I would not expect to move to the Middle East and turn it into North America. We should not be pushed to change our home.

[Karma Ninja]

The deepest hypocrisy of the left, on this issue, is the part where they ignore that this is the same temporary ban that Obama put into effect against the people of Iran and that the list of banned nations comes from the Obama administrations list of most dangerous rogue terrorist nations. It is a temporary ban that does not include all Muslims or all Muslim nations. In fact, it does not even contain the most populous Muslim nations in the world. (Indonesia, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia). It is NOT a Muslim ban.

The left has lost it's mind. Literally. They find themselves acting just as intolerant, divisive and irrational as all the people they oppose.

[Sean]

Well, I started this thread, so, I have to report back that I've found out there is "more to the story".

I follow WikiLeaks on Twitter, and they tweeted out a link to the "Jimmy Dore" show on YouTube:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4FTFB9GDfls

Watch it, he makes reference to an article written by Seth Frantzman that effectively destroys this whole "ban" scenario, and points out the hypocrisy of protesting the "banning" of Muslims from coming here, but NOT protesting the BOMBING of the same people under Obama. Further, the 7 countries named, were named because they were following Obama's template on the issue. You'll see when you watch. I have to admit, good points are made throughout.

Not a fan of Trump..But we were clearly(purposely) uninformed/misinformed (lied to) by media who didn't say these things.

Not a fan of Trump..But this whole thing is clearly a manipulation. That makes me very angry.. Thought I was a little smarter than that. Link to Frantzman article here:https://www.google.com/amp/s/sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/amp/?client=ms-android-metropcs-us

Last thing: If Frantzman can break things down like this, than so could Duff.
He didn't.
Done with VT.

[Eric J (Viking)]

Sorry couldn't embed video. Short but another perspective.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=JNu4xU9qOEM

Viking

[joeecho]

Sorry couldn't embed video. Short but another perspective.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNu4xU9qOEM

(I edited your post to embed the video)

Viking

Another great example of media manipulation.


(The overdone sarcasm of the speaker and ridiculous voice gets annoying really fast while watching this video.)

[Jules]

Sorry couldn't embed video. Short but another perspective.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=JNu4xU9qOEM

Viking

This man is on Alex Jones a lot talking about the demise of Europe by Islam... This is bad people. Here is a perspective of the Islam agenda as well. If this is a peaceful religion, how come it is only peaceful if we bow down to them? There is a lot I don't understand, however I do understand manipulation and bullying.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--nOQdtD7sY

[Eric J (Viking)]

Some more here...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DdbjdQYymBk&feature=youtu.be

Viking

[Tangri]

Starting at min. 1:50

WlAflFRpeZw



"Having said that, I have not studied that Koran, so I rely on the word of authority here (Sam Harris), which is often a slippery slope.[/QUOTE by Eram]

mwWXEV7MHgc

[Eram]

Starting at min. 1:50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlAflFRpeZw



"Having said that, I have not studied that Koran, so I rely on the word of authority here (Sam Harris), which is often a slippery slope.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwWXEV7MHgc

Hi Tangri,
My initial comment was directed at the scripture of the Islam religion and not so much as what has and is being done in the name of religion.

I'm well aware of the horrible things that was done under the banner of the catholic church, but then we are discussing something else entirely.

I specifically meant what is being advocated through the religions scripture, on which religions are based.

In any case, I'd better not have made that comment about Islam to begin with, since it adds little to the story line of this thread.


Well, I started this thread, so, I have to report back that I've found out there is "more to the story".

I follow WikiLeaks on Twitter, and they tweeted out a link to the "Jimmy Dore" show on YouTube:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4FTFB9GDfls

Watch it, he makes reference to an article written by Seth Frantzman that effectively destroys this whole "ban" scenario, and points out the hypocrisy of protesting the "banning" of Muslims from coming here, but NOT protesting the BOMBING of the same people under Obama. Further, the 7 countries named, were named because they were following Obama's template on the issue. You'll see when you watch. I have to admit, good points are made throughout.

Not a fan of Trump..But we were clearly(purposely) uninformed/misinformed (lied to) by media who didn't say these things.


Thanks for the link to that Jimmy Dore show Sean.
Very clear analyses of the situation and manipulations going on.

I think we may expect much of more of these kind of media manipulations in the times to come, since the media in the US is still clustered in 6 large companies, thus centralized and therefore a propaganda mouthpiece for the ones who control those 6 companies.

[avid]

DdbjdQYymBk
For Viking, thanks 👍

[Bill Ryan]

.
Mod note: I merged all three current threads about this, as I think the various posts all inform each other (and everyone interested in the topic).

I also changed the thread title to a more general President Trump's 'Muslim ban', to encompass all aspects of the discussion.

[Desire]

The cabal is raising its ugly head thru the Democratic Party and their world government controlled news.....and behind it all I see Hillery smirking.

I PRAY THEY CAN'T IMPEACH TRUMP

[bluestflame]

if dick cheney wants refugee intake to continue , makes me want to look closer into the motivations 6-OMW9BbHyE

Published on Dec 7, 2015


Fmr VP Cheney rejects ban on Muslim immigration/visas: "It goes against everything we believe in." this was before trumps ban

i suspect trumps intel suggests this is how cia etc were transporting assets both local and imported

continuation of draining of the swamp

google genie energy company

to me it suggests if they ARE building terrorist cells locally time is running out .... for them

[DNA]

We are seeing an all out war for the contol of the thinking/perceptions of mankind ... it rolls at a furious pace , with division as the end game behind the wizards curtain ... I see one group wanting to stop radical islam from coming into America, another group wanting anyone who wants in to be allowed in ... there has to be a way to end all the division and hate , and people losing their minds ... its a dangerous road we travel ...oh how I long for peace , Love and harmony across the world ...

It pains me to post this, as I never in all my life thought that I would live through something like this in my own home. I have been raised to accept all people of the world and always have, yet I have never experienced anything like I am living through currently. My hope is that this is a bad dream. Please do not think that I am a racist or anything like that - this hurts me to my soul because just like Whitelove, I have always tried to love all people unconditionally as best as I could.

Ghost rider, my fear is that it is bigger than just the USA. Look at the difficulties recently seen in France and Britain due to the migration of Muslim populations. I personally live in a Muslim neighborhood in Canada - my wife and daughter have both been the target of Muslim kids throwing stones at them. I had to pull my kids from the public school that was primarily Muslim due to all kinds of problems. The neighbors have tried to have the city remove my pets as they do not seem to like dogs. The city was so overwhelmed with false complaints that we were forced to trial to defend ourselves but it was thrown out due to the allegations having no evidence of truth. Now our prime minister is saying that he will allow more Muslims in.
My fear is that this is a world wide problem to bring instability everywhere until we all collapse in upon ourselves in chaos.

Patient

I really feel for you and hope your situation has improved. Liberal whites should all be made to live where you do.

But I also get so mad hearing people like you say, "... I have always tried to love all people unconditionally as best as I could."
My God, when will whites stop this self-destructive nonsense!

DEBRIEFING FROM NEW AGE MIND CONTROL 101:
- It is not normal to love everybody.
-Unconditional love is not unattainable except for prophets and saints. Even parents hate their own kids sometimes. Unless you're God or Jesus, STOP IT...
-Stop worrying about being racist. You didn't hurt anyone, you are far from 'privileged', you are not responsible for anyone else's behavior living or dead, you are not responsible for historical events or current events.

This New Age love trip was a deliberate strategy probably created out of Tavistock or one of the ruling class think tanks to undermine middle class caucasians for the purpose of making them doubt themselves, doubt their common sense, their intuition and most of all - disable their survival instincts - so every white country can be prepped for no human rights and third world living standards. They can't have their one world order with a white middle class who believes their human rights come from God. You are not nuts, it is happening before your eyes.

When you say to Ghostrider - ".. Ghost rider, my fear is that it is bigger than just the USA." That is your God given intelligence, survival instincts and intuition which brainwashing (New Age Love Everyone garbage) seeks to override. Many christians have unfortunately misinterpreted christianity and are making themselves victims with the 'love those who persecute you' and all that jazz...

What comes after throwing rocks at your children? If you want to get rid of the horrible feeling of victimization, you need to divest yourself of the 'love everyone' horse manure.. You will feel more free than you ever have...

You can pray for world peace or who and whatever you want but loving everybody is a BIG JOKE that has been perpetrated on us and the ruling class are laughing their heads off.

Don't forget you are part of the 'everybody' you keep trying to love and wasting energy on people that hate you is not only not loving yourself - you're not teaching your children self-respect, self-love or to have good survival instincts.

As I've tried to say before, a famous shepherd once told his flock "Do not cast pearls before swine". he loved his flock and didn't want them to be stupid, dumb sheep.


Rarely will I leave quotes nested going back three posters, but I'm doing so here on purpose.
Patient's response to Ghostrider is amazing and I thank Patient for his/her amazing testimonial.
And then we get to Helen West who is dropping the knowledge bomb.
For those who may have skipped her post due to it's length I implore you to read it. Helen West you are now a marked poster, I will be clicking on your profile and checking what you have written regardless of the topics from now on.
In this one post you have shown an amazing breadth of knowledge and wisdom, I'm absolutely looking forward to more posts like this, thank you. :handshake:
Oh, and Helen with your mention of the Tavistock institute I would like to give folks a video for the ability to look into this.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svEVXCXICow
svEVXCXICow

[Billy Vasiliadis]

I think that the socio-economic situations in many of these Muslim majority countries cannot be ignored or undermined. Many of these countries are, from all I've seen and heard, factories of despair. Poverty and war are things that many of these people have to live with on a regular basis. Not to mention the fact that, we here in the West, have played no small part in the creation and prolonging of these conditions. We are all conditioned by our environment, and I think some of the troubling behavior we see from some migrants needs to be contextualized by this fact, and not lay all the blame on religion. As many people have pointed out, this is a really intense time. Tensions and emotions are running high, I just hope we are able to not lose sight of the importance of compassion. I think we need to try to maintain a cool head and even a level of detachment, to help us in not being rash and unthinking. I know I haven't been able to do that a lot of the time, and I will most probably slip up many more times, but I think it is worth striving for.

[Chester]

Hi Mods, I see the thread that I started was merged with another and so I ask that the posts in this thread continue to have the title of the thread I created be the same as the shown by default in posts made in this thread. The reason is because the thread title "President Trump's 'Muslim Ban' is incorrect as his EO was not a Muslim Ban.

The proper title should be as I created -

Trump's Executive Order - Entry Suspension (aka by MSM as the "Muslim Ban")

not this one

President Trump's 'Muslim ban'

as this title is misleading.

[Bill Ryan]

Hi Mods, I see the thread that I started was merged with another and so I ask that the posts in this thread continue to have the title of the thread I created be the same as the shown by default in posts made in this thread. The reason is because the thread title "President Trump's 'Muslim Ban' is incorrect as his EO was not a Muslim Ban.

The proper title should be as I created -

Trump's Executive Order - Entry Suspension (aka by MSM as the "Muslim Ban")

not this one

President Trump's 'Muslim ban'

as this title is misleading.

Hi there, Sam — happy to rename the thread again: not a problem. (Note that I'd deliberately put 'Muslim ban' in inverted commas.) Of course, 'Entry Suspension' is the accurate term.

[Chester]

wow and Thanks and yes, I did notice the inverted commas but when you see my next thread, my request will make more sense... post coming shortly.

[Bill Ryan]

.
Here’s an analogy that may or may not be helpful.
(Like all analogies, it’s limited, but may be useful to anyone who’s influenced by the media, or is having trouble seeing things clearly.)

There are four ‘stages’ in granting rights (or not).


Privilege.
Right.
Demand.
Enforcement.

Hang on in here, and I’ll explain.

My house here in Ecuador borders on other properties where the owners don’t have such a high standard of living, and aren’t so prosperous.

(Actually, I'm not all prosperous, even by Ecuadorian standards, and live very simply indeed. But my house is larger than my neighbors' houses, it's fairly comfortable, and has a number of modern appliances and conveniences that my neighbors may not have.)


So, is it a privilege for them to come into my house, if they knock on the door politely and ask?
— Sure. I have that choice whether to grant them that privilege or not.
Is it their right to come in?
— No. The only people who have a right are those who I've given a key to. (That’s what house keys are for.)
Can they demand to come in?
— Well, they can try. But I’d not let them in unless they had a pretty good reason.
Can they enforce an entry to my house?
— Yes, they can break in. And squat, or try to. But if they did that, it'd be illegal (rightly so), and I might be rather upset.

It’s the same with nation-states. I have my own little ‘nation-state’ here, and while I didn’t actually build the house, I’ve equipped it with good infrastructure so that everything works well, and I also pay all the bills to maintain that.

I'm a resident of Ecuador, though I'm a British citizen. I have a right to be here. Ecuador ‘opened their door’ and invited me in, after I'd asked politely and formally.

If I were to commit a serious Ecuadorian crime, or in some other way abuse my status as an invited long-term guest, Ecuador would then have the right to ask me to leave. (And even enforce that, if I were not to comply.)

I cannot demand to be here. And I can’t enforce my staying here. (Unless I were to go hide out in the jungle.)

I’ll now address these questions directly to Sean (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/member.php?22125-Sean), who wanted Trump to be impeached (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?95705-Trump-s-Executive-Order-Entry-Suspension--aka-by-MSM-as-the-Muslim-Ban--&p=1130644&viewfull=1#post1130644). They're serious debating questions, to make a point (of course).


If I were to demand to stay in your apartment (I know a little about very approximately where it is, but I do not have the right to share that here :) — unless you think I do, of course!) … would you acquiesce to my demand?
Or would you say — “Hey, hang on! This isn’t personal, but you have no right to be here. This is my place, and it’s up to me whether you crash on my floor or not.”



If I enforced entry to your place (by breaking in without your knowledge or permission), would you call the police and have me evicted (‘deported’)?



If you were to refuse my demands, should you have your sovereign status removed? (i.e. should you be ‘impeached’, and have your decision-making rights taken away?)



Do you believe I (as a British citizen) have a right to come and live and work in the US, just because I might feel like it?



Do you believe you (as an American citizen) have the right to come and live and work in Britain, any time you want?


If you do believe those last two things, then you're effectively saying that you believe all national boundaries and entry controls should be removed — which is exactly what the globalist agenda is.

[KiwiElf]

Fantastic Bill - I'll borrow your "analogy" to explain it to brainwashed friends & associates who are already programmed into the "Trump is Banning ALL Muslims" meme (I suggested they stop listening to the fakestream media) ;)

[kerrielea]

Love the way you explained the scale! :-)

Privilege
Right
Demand
Enforce

[Chester]

Bill, of the thousands of great posts you have ever written, this post ranks right up there at the top. On a planet with over 7 billion known people how is it possible to live together without accepting that others have the same rights we wish for ourselves.

Along the same lines of - "Do with regards to others as you wish them to do with regards to you."

"Accept the rights of others as you expect others to respect your rights."

...and if you don't, understand others have the right to expect that these rights be honored, if that respect is not honored, then a jurisdiction has the right to enforce that respect.

Clear thinking.

What a relief to read a post so clearly thoughtful.

[Sean]

.
Here’s an analogy that may or may not be helpful.
(Like all analogies, it’s limited, but may be useful to anyone who’s influenced by the media, or is having trouble seeing things clearly.)

There are four ‘stages’ in granting rights (or not).


Privilege.
Right.
Demand.
Enforcement.

Hang on in here, and I’ll explain.

My house here in Ecuador borders on other properties where the owners don’t have such a high standard of living, and aren’t so prosperous.

(Actually, I'm not all prosperous, even by Ecuadorian standards, and live very simply indeed. But my house is larger than my neighbors' houses, it's fairly comfortable, and has a number of modern appliances and conveniences that my neighbors may not have.)


So, is it a privilege for them to come into my house, if they knock on the door politely and ask?
— Sure. I have that choice whether to grant them that privilege or not.
Is it their right to come in?
— No. The only people who have a right are those who I've given a key to. (That’s what house keys are for.)
Can they demand to come in?
— Well, they can try. But I’d not let them in unless they had a pretty good reason.
Can they enforce an entry to my house?
— Yes, they can break in. And squat, or try to. But if they did that, it'd be illegal (rightly so), and I might be rather upset.

It’s the same with nation-states. I have my own little ‘nation-state’ here, and while I didn’t actually build the house, I’ve equipped it with good infrastructure so that everything works well, and I also pay all the bills to maintain that.

I'm a resident of Ecuador, though I'm a British citizen. I have a right to be here. Ecuador ‘opened their door’ and invited me in, after I'd asked politely and formally.

If I were to commit a serious Ecuadorian crime, or in some other way abuse my status as an invited long-term guest, Ecuador would then have the right to ask me to leave. (And even enforce that, if I were not to comply.)

I cannot demand to be here. And I can’t enforce my staying here. (Unless I were to go hide out in the jungle.)

I’ll now address these questions directly to Sean (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/member.php?22125-Sean), who wanted Trump to be impeached (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?95705-Trump-s-Executive-Order-Entry-Suspension--aka-by-MSM-as-the-Muslim-Ban--&p=1130644&viewfull=1#post1130644). They're serious debating questions, to make a point (of course).


If I were to demand to stay in your apartment (I know a little about very approximately where it is, but I do not have the right to share that here :) — unless you think I do, of course!) … would you acquiesce to my demand?
Or would you say — “Hey, hang on! This isn’t personal, but you have no right to be here. This is my place, and it’s up to me whether you crash on my floor or not.”



If I enforced entry to your place (by breaking in without your knowledge or permission), would you call the police and have me evicted (‘deported’)?



If you were to refuse my demands, should you have your sovereign status removed? (i.e. should you be ‘impeached’, and have your decision-making rights taken away?)



Do you believe I (as a British citizen) have a right to come and live and work in the US, just because I might feel like it?



Do you believe you (as an American citizen) have the right to come and live and work in Britain, any time you want?


If you do believe those last two things, then you're effectively saying that you believe all national boundaries and entry controls should be removed — which is exactly what the globalist agenda is.

The basis for impeachment is President Trump's violation of the constitution, which he swore to uphold and defend. ACLU breaks it down here: https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/well-see-you-court-why-trumps-executive-order-refugees-violates-establishment

I get your point, Bill, but where Trump runs into legal trouble is targeting Islam specifically, and favoring christians over muslims. It is this issue that allowed the temporary stays on these EO's to be granted.

[Foxie Loxie]

Thanks so much, DNA, for posting the Tavistock video with Dr. Coleman....what an eyeopener!! :happythumbsup: I do marvel that he has not been taken out yet.

[Bill Ryan]

I get your point, Bill, but where Trump runs into legal trouble is targeting Islam specifically, and favoring christians over muslims. It is this issue that allowed the temporary stays on these EO's to be granted.

Well (as I understand it) he's 'targeting' seven Islamic countries.

A good question to ask (and I do not know the answer for sure) is whether a Christian from those countries would also have their entry suspended. (But I do believe their entry would be suspended, because of their nationality.)

The text (headline) reads


Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern.

As best I can see, reading the document, it's about nationality. Not religion.

[Sean]

I get your point, Bill, but where Trump runs into legal trouble is targeting Islam specifically, and favoring christians over muslims. It is this issue that allowed the temporary stays on these EO's to be granted.

Well (as I understand it) he's 'targeting' seven Islamic countries.

A good question to ask (and I do not know the answer for sure) is whether a Christian from those countries would also have their entry suspended. (But I do believe their entry would be suspended, because of their nationality.)

The text (headline) reads


Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern.

As best I can see, reading the document, it's about nationality. Not religion.

I don't have the exact quote handy, but Trump indicated that christians from those targeted countries would be prioritized over muslims, and, I think that's where he runs into trouble. I think that is separate from the current "pause". I'm at work, but, I'll try to find the quote later(there may be video of him saying it).

[Bob]

The Document in FULL - I did not see any specific BAN or entry suspension describing any religion, Muslim, nor Christian - the suspension describes those who are of a specific bent (the characteristics are described in the Order) to commit harm to the US, or its Citizens. I will not put this in quotes so that it can be read easily. I will increase the text size so that it can be read easily.

“Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.”

"By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States. Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when State Department policy prevented consular officers from properly scrutinizing the visa applications of several of the 19 foreign nationals who went on to murder nearly 3,000 Americans. And while the visa-issuance process was reviewed and amended after the September 11 attacks to better detect would-be terrorists from receiving visas, these measures did not stop attacks by foreign nationals who were admitted to the United States.

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. Deteriorating conditions in certain countries due to war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest increase the likelihood that terrorists will use any means possible to enter the United States. The United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism.

In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.


Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and to prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.

Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately conduct a review to determine the information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President a report on the results of the review described in subsection (a) of this section, including the Secretary of Homeland Security’s determination of the information needed for adjudications and a list of countries that do not provide adequate information, within 30 days of the date of this order. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence.

(c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

(d) Immediately upon receipt of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request all foreign governments that do not supply such information to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification.

(e) After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this section until compliance occurs.

(f) At any point after submitting the list described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Homeland Security may submit to the President the names of any additional countries recommended for similar treatment.

(g) Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or pursuant to a Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.

(h) The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall submit to the President a joint report on the progress in implementing this orderwithin 30 days of the date of this order, a second report within 60 daysof the date of this order, a third report within 90 days of the date of this order, and a fourth report within 120 days of the date of this order.

Sec. 4. Implementing Uniform Screening Standards for All Immigration Programs. (a) The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall implement a program, as part of the adjudication process for immigration benefits, to identify individuals seeking to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis with the intent to cause harm, or who are at risk of causing harm subsequent to their admission. This program will include the development of a uniform screening standard and procedure, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that the applicant is who the applicant claims to be; a process to evaluate the applicant’s likelihood of becoming a positively contributing member of society and the applicant’s ability to make contributions to the national interest; and a mechanism to assess whether or not the applicant has the intent to commit criminal or terrorist acts after entering the United States.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of State, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of this directive within 60 days of the date of this order, a second report within 100 days of the date of this order, and a third report within 200 days of the date of this order.

Sec. 5. Realignment of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for Fiscal Year 2017. (a) The Secretary of State shall suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days. During the 120-day period, the Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, shall review the USRAP application and adjudication process to determine what additional procedures should be taken to ensure that those approved for refugee admission do not pose a threat to the security and welfare of the United States, and shall implement such additional procedures. Refugee applicants who are already in the USRAP process may be admitted upon the initiation and completion of these revised procedures. Upon the date that is 120 days after the date of this order, the Secretary of State shall resume USRAP admissions only for nationals of countries for which the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence have jointly determined that such additional procedures are adequate to ensure the security and welfare of the United States.

(b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to 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. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.

(c) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest.

(d) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017 would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I determine that additional admissions would be in the national interest.

(e) Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest — including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship — and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States.

(f) The Secretary of State shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of the directive in subsection (b) of this section regarding prioritization of claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution within 100 days of the date of this order and shall submit a second report within 200 days of the date of this order.

(g) It is the policy of the executive branch that, to the extent permitted by law and as practicable, State and local jurisdictions be granted a role in the process of determining the placement or settlement in their jurisdictions of aliens eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees. To that end, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall examine existing law to determine the extent to which, consistent with applicable law, State and local jurisdictions may have greater involvement in the process of determining the placement or resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions, and shall devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement.

Sec. 6. Rescission of Exercise of Authority Relating to the Terrorism Grounds of Inadmissibility. The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, consider rescinding the exercises of authority in section 212 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182, relating to the terrorism grounds of inadmissibility, as well as any related implementing memoranda.

Sec. 7. Expedited Completion of the Biometric Entry-Exit Tracking System. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit tracking system for all travelers to the United States, as recommended by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the President periodic reports on the progress of the directive contained in subsection (a) of this section. The initial report shall be submitted within 100 days of the date of this order, a second report shall be submitted within 200 days of the date of this order, and a third report shall be submitted within 365 days of the date of this order. Further, the Secretary shall submit a report every 180 days thereafter until the system is fully deployed and operational.

Sec. 8. Visa Interview Security. (a) The Secretary of State shall immediately suspend the Visa Interview Waiver Program and ensure compliance with section 222 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1222, which requires that all individuals seeking a nonimmigrant visa undergo an in-person interview, subject to specific statutory exceptions.

(b) To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of State shall immediately expand the Consular Fellows Program, including by substantially increasing the number of Fellows, lengthening or making permanent the period of service, and making language training at the Foreign Service Institute available to Fellows for assignment to posts outside of their area of core linguistic ability, to ensure that non-immigrant visa-interview wait times are not unduly affected.

Sec. 9. Visa Validity Reciprocity. The Secretary of State shall review all nonimmigrant visa reciprocity agreements to ensure that they are, with respect to each visa classification, truly reciprocal insofar as practicable with respect to validity period and fees, as required by sections 221(c) and 281 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1201(c) and 1351, and other treatment. If a country does not treat United States nationals seeking nonimmigrant visas in a reciprocal manner, the Secretary of State shall adjust the visa validity period, fee schedule, or other treatment to match the treatment of United States nationals by the foreign country, to the extent practicable.

Sec. 10. Transparency and Data Collection. (a) To be more transparent with the American people, and to more effectively implement policies and practices that serve the national interest, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall, consistent with applicable law and national security, collect and make publicly available within 180 days, and every 180 days thereafter:

(i) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation, or material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national security reasons since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later;

(ii) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and

(iii) information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including honor killings, in the United States by foreign nationals, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and

(iv) any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses.

(b) The Secretary of State shall, within one year of the date of this order, provide a report on the estimated long-term costs of the USRAP at the Federal, State, and local levels.

Sec. 11. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. "

[pyrangello]

So of the 7 listed countries, 350,000 individuals traveled to the US in one day from those countries,most legally, out of that 109 were detained for a period of time because something wasn't right. I believe the suspension is for 90-120 days for all of these countries to review the procedure for these countries in particular, Pakistan and Afghanistan are not listed, neither is Jordan or Saudi Arabia,which are all muslum countires FYI. Out of the 7 countries on the list- 3 currently have civil wars going and 1 is a state sponsored country of terror. The media and these paid for marches in some cases along with the loopy actors in california and the crying schumer make this sound like the end of the world was coming over the weekend. Hey I have a news flash, this is America and we can close our borders if we want to . Its our country. Now that may sound selfish but the immigration will be opened up again after this review and whats so wrong with that. FYI all of my grandparents immigrated to this country on both sides of my parents. So now we take a pause for a few months and fine tune the system and then open this up again as we do to 3 million a year legally from around the world every year. And to all who have immigrated here to the United States legally and became an American thru the process the right way,I welcome you as a new American and hope you can prosper and live , work and worship with as much freedom as you like.

[WildOrchid]

.
Here’s an analogy that may or may not be helpful.
(Like all analogies, it’s limited, but may be useful to anyone who’s influenced by the media, or is having trouble seeing things clearly.)

There are four ‘stages’ in granting rights (or not).


Privilege.
Right.
Demand.
Enforcement.

Hang on in here, and I’ll explain.

My house here in Ecuador borders on other properties where the owners don’t have such a high standard of living, and aren’t so prosperous.

(Actually, I'm not all prosperous, even by Ecuadorian standards, and live very simply indeed. But my house is larger than my neighbors' houses, it's fairly comfortable, and has a number of modern appliances and conveniences that my neighbors may not have.)


So, is it a privilege for them to come into my house, if they knock on the door politely and ask?
— Sure. I have that choice whether to grant them that privilege or not.
Is it their right to come in?
— No. The only people who have a right are those who I've given a key to. (That’s what house keys are for.)
Can they demand to come in?
— Well, they can try. But I’d not let them in unless they had a pretty good reason.
Can they enforce an entry to my house?
— Yes, they can break in. And squat, or try to. But if they did that, it'd be illegal (rightly so), and I might be rather upset.

It’s the same with nation-states. I have my own little ‘nation-state’ here, and while I didn’t actually build the house, I’ve equipped it with good infrastructure so that everything works well, and I also pay all the bills to maintain that.

I'm a resident of Ecuador, though I'm a British citizen. I have a right to be here. Ecuador ‘opened their door’ and invited me in, after I'd asked politely and formally.

If I were to commit a serious Ecuadorian crime, or in some other way abuse my status as an invited long-term guest, Ecuador would then have the right to ask me to leave. (And even enforce that, if I were not to comply.)

I cannot demand to be here. And I can’t enforce my staying here. (Unless I were to go hide out in the jungle.)

I’ll now address these questions directly to Sean (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/member.php?22125-Sean), who wanted Trump to be impeached (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?95705-Trump-s-Executive-Order-Entry-Suspension--aka-by-MSM-as-the-Muslim-Ban--&p=1130644&viewfull=1#post1130644). They're serious debating questions, to make a point (of course).


If I were to demand to stay in your apartment (I know a little about very approximately where it is, but I do not have the right to share that here :) — unless you think I do, of course!) … would you acquiesce to my demand?
Or would you say — “Hey, hang on! This isn’t personal, but you have no right to be here. This is my place, and it’s up to me whether you crash on my floor or not.”



If I enforced entry to your place (by breaking in without your knowledge or permission), would you call the police and have me evicted (‘deported’)?



If you were to refuse my demands, should you have your sovereign status removed? (i.e. should you be ‘impeached’, and have your decision-making rights taken away?)



Do you believe I (as a British citizen) have a right to come and live and work in the US, just because I might feel like it?



Do you believe you (as an American citizen) have the right to come and live and work in Britain, any time you want?


If you do believe those last two things, then you're effectively saying that you believe all national boundaries and entry controls should be removed — which is exactly what the globalist agenda is.

Well said Bill, and exactly my point too.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

This is all people need to know:


President Obama himself barred large groups of immigrants from entering the U.S. at least six times out of national security concerns, according to a review last June by the Washington Examiner. In 2011, the administration suspended refugee processing from Iraq for six months to make sure terrorists weren't exploiting the program.

The Examiner also found that "President Bill Clinton issued six immigrant bans; George W. Bush six immigrant bans; and former President Ronald Reagan four. And in 1980, former President Jimmy Carter banned Iranians after Tehran seized the U.S. embassy."

Nor is Trump's refugee cap in any way draconian. Data from the Migration Policy Institute shows that, while the cap was higher under the previous two presidents, the actual number of refugees admitted over the past 15 years has been at or below 50,000 most of the time. In fact, the average number of refugees admitted under Bush was 48,000 a year.

In any case, Trump's halt to Syrian refugees won't make a difference one way or another in the Syrian refugee crisis. In the five years after the Syrian war started in 2011, Obama had admitted all of 1,883 Syrian refugees. Obama's highly controversial decision last year to let in 13,000 didn't make a dent in the 4 million-plus Syrian refugee population.

What's extreme isn't what Trump did, it's the entirely out-of-proportion reaction from his political opponents, the press, and many weak-kneed Republicans.

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/are-we-going-to-freak-out-every-time-trump-does-what-he-promised/


The communist propaganda machine is running at full steam trying to find any way to raise an outcry to stop Trump from ruining globalists' plans. That's the only thing that's really different this time.

Like the article above also says, this was clearly part of Trump's campaign promise for a long time. People are acting like the order came out of nowhere. I guess people just aren't used to presidents actually doing what they said they would do.

[Shannon]

I personally do not think Trump is specifically targeting Muslims because it's a religion. Regardless to whether he or anyone in his staff called it a "Muslim country".... I believe and I may be wrong that he knows that those countries are ruled by their religion....Meaning the church controls the state...

If he was targeting Muslims he would have to "ban" all the other 40 Muslim countries. See? I just called them Muslim countries. Cause that's what they are.

[James Newell]

It is good to see some revelations re Trump and the muslim ban. There is A LOT of misinformation on Trump. And the media are going for broke on it. I can only assume the MSM and some of their cohorts have their orders to try to mess up the turn around of America getting out of the NWO.

Also for a very knowledgeable website re Islam check politicalislam.com you should be able to download a very readable Koran and Hadith and Sira which all should be read as a historial crosscheck.

I think one of the basic themes I learned is the duality aspect of Islam ... under the guise of religion they enter then they introduce the political side often through force. Muhammad had a few converts(a few hundred) in the first ten years of his sect then when they got armies involved which basically killed off the opposition they made rapid expansion. In the 1400 years or so of Islam they were directly responsible for over 300 million deaths in their religious wars. The enslavement factor is another stat.

[Bruno]

Hopefully this isn't too off topic but the intensity of this issue has me reflecting on a few things.

I was in high school in the mid to late 80's. We had a sizable Muslim population at my school, mostly Turkish in background, some from North African countries like Somalia and a few from the Middle East including Saudi Arabia. (An urban Canadian public school) I don't remember any concerns about Muslims during that time period. I could have been ignorant to under currents, I was a teenager after all but I just don't remember any concerns? Two of the Saudi Arabian boys were real sexist jerks but I never attributed that to their religion more to their culture. I do remember people making comments about one of the Muslim girls who wore a head scarf, but I just thought that was a general fear of things that seemed different.

I bring this up because I wonder what was the event that put us on this collision course? For me growing up, this Muslim vs. Christian thing was something that was historical or happened in localized Middle Eastern areas. Sometimes I wonder where all of this has really come from? It feels like we are being played big time. My personal experience with people who are Muslim does not relate to anything I see in the media. I am not saying that radicalism doesn't exist but what grew this? And why is this ban by Trump going to help? How does banning millions of people keep us safe from the unsavory few?

I studied the Koran and the Torah (Old Testament) in University. Not in a lot of depth, undergrad courses. Both books are full of confusing violent stories and ideologies in my mind. Yes Islam has that piece about about spreading Islam by the sword, but the Old Testament has some pretty violent ideas about conflict resolution, stoning people to death and such. I just don't see how Islam as a religion is any more violent at its core than Judaism or Christianity.

Many Germans felt justified in their persecution of Jews. And many people turned a blind eye because they either agreed or didn't care until it effected them personally. Is this not the same slippery slope?

Or how about the Japanese internment camps in Canada and the US during World War 2? People felt that it was necessary for the safety of Canadians and Americans that people of Japanese ancestry should be gathered up and monitored.

Our rights are always taken away at least initially with the argument of "it's for your safety".


So trump is banning Muslims, but why not Saudi Muslims? Pakistani Muslims? Why are those Muslims acceptable? Is it because they have oil or military power or are there other less cynical reasons that I am not aware of?

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Sometimes I wonder where all of this has really come from? It feels like we are being played big time.

It's been under the radar for years. The same thing has been happening in Europe. The Secretary of State of Berlin is in favor of Sharia law now. As Muslim populations increase they become increasingly involved in politics and their religion, as pointed out above, is intricately related to their political views, which include discrimination against women.

I don't know if you're familiar with the metaphor, but if you want to boil a live frog to death, so the saying goes, you only increase the temperature in the water little by little so that he doesn't notice what's happening to him until it's too late. The NWO works the same way.

Trump's election has thrown a wrench into their political machine and that's what you're also going to see big breaks with these multinational climate agreements that shut down industry in developed countries, taking back control of our border, getting out of NAFTA and reworking trade deals, and the destruction of a lot of other pillars of the planned global government.

We were quietly marching toward a totalitarian global government and that is being reversed now all across the west by increasingly informed and aware nationalist movements.

[turiya]

The people who are to be kept out by the Trumpster would cut your head off just as easily as breathing. Those to whom violence is a valid way of life. It is only a 4 month ban. During that time the present US government will attempt to establish a vetting procedure that is actually that. As things are now I would keep out all unmarried male Muslims between the ages of 15 to 55 until we can vet people properly. And that may be just a pipe dream. But we have to try. If you have been married for a few years (no marriages of convenience) or have a guaranteed good paying job, come on in. Otherwise we are going to be cautious.

It would be more accurate to say some of the people who are to be kept out by the Trumpster would cut your head off just as easily as breathing.

Many of the people affected are Christians fleeing persecution. Woman and children. I am not certain that America would be a good place for the refugees considering the current political and social climate. Also I feel that it makes more sense for them to settle closer to their homeland, if possible, for ease of acclimation and return to homeland should things change enough to allow for the safe repatriation...

abmqa

Then, I see that you agree with Stefan Molyneux regarding what the MSM has dubbed "The Muslim Ban"...

There is still some hope for you, yet... :)



What Pisses Me Off About
President Trump's "Muslim Ban"
(Published on Jan 29, 2017)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OVnqerWUHg

[TargeT]

I don't have the exact quote handy, but Trump indicated that christians from those targeted countries would be prioritized over muslims, and, I think that's where he runs into trouble. I think that is separate from the current "pause". I'm at work, but, I'll try to find the quote later(there may be video of him saying it).

Thats where the media gets in trouble,, people can say what ever they want, what they do is important...

Trump has a lot of "bluster" then acts very "smartly"...... this is that.
6b0bIEMsHwM

This VERY quickly explains it in totality... the list of 7 countries came from Obama, Trump is just pushing the same list.
JNu4xU9qOEM

[Chester]

The basis for impeachment is President Trump's violation of the constitution, which he swore to uphold and defend. ACLU breaks it down here: https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/well-see-you-court-why-trumps-executive-order-refugees-violates-establishment

I get your point, Bill, but where Trump runs into legal trouble is targeting Islam specifically, and favoring christians over muslims. It is this issue that allowed the temporary stays on these EO's to be granted.

There is no case for violation of the Establishment Clause because the EO did not target folks based on religion. The media will tell you otherwise but the reality trumps all lies (pun intended). The EO targeted citizens that are from countries (or who have recently held residency in those countries)... countries who overtly refuse to cooperate with the US with regards to the vetting of those who wish to visit or reside in the United States, countries who do not have a reasonable amount if any documentation (such as Syria currently) and/or countries who are known as massive funding sources for terrorism such as Iran. These seven countries were designated as such by the Obama administration, actions which also were supported by Chuck Schumer and multiple Democrats by the way when the country designation was created and restrictions were placed on these countries and all these actions were signed into law.

Even CNN tells the truth about this in an article released today. - read here (http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/29/politics/how-the-trump-administration-chose-the-7-countries/)

A case such as this will go nowhere.

The media loves to stir up a frenzy regardless of what is the actual truth and likely reality. Does anyone reading this still not know this?? Seriously?

I would like to point out that the EO was required prior to the announcement of the strategy being made public with regards to defeating ISIS (some of which was revealed today by Sean Spicer). The EO was required to protect folks in the US as the administration knew that the strategy revelation would indeed incite actions by ISIS and figured it would be wiser first to tighten up entry capabilities. I call that obviously wise.

Two more points - did folks know that most of the other countries in that region of the world which have an Islamic majority population have far stricter entry policies?

Did folks know that the Trump administration is receiving kuddos from other countries in the region which have an Islamic majority population?

Think you'll hear about either of these last two facts from any MSM outlet other than maybe FOX News?

[Eram]

Target,

I do wonder about the safe zones though.
Common sense dictates that a "no fly" zone is needed to also to make a safe zone work right?

Under the current situation, that would mean potentially shooting down Russian jets right?

Perhaps Trump takes all this into consideration and comes up with a plan that bypasses all these problems.

We'll see.

[Chester]

I don't have the exact quote handy, but Trump indicated that christians from those targeted countries would be prioritized over muslims, and, I think that's where he runs into trouble. I think that is separate from the current "pause". I'm at work, but, I'll try to find the quote later(there may be video of him saying it).

I will try and help with this -

What he said (implied) was that people who are proven to be victims of religious persecution will be prioritized over those whose circumstances are otherwise the same. He pointed out that in some cases, this did apply to Christians. Even the FSM has reported on this truth. Horrific persecution, beheadings just for their religion, etc.

Who could possibly have a problem with that?

Also, just because he said that does not mean that will be implemented either by law or an EO. Just like Trump says he believes waterboarding should be used, he also has left the decision to use waterboarding up to the professionals he appointed. Judge the actions and the results (and stay away from judging short term results, especially when those actions and results are gleaned from the FakeStreamMedia (Thanks KiwiElf - that's a perfect term).

EDIT: I replaced the word "discrimination" with "persecution" as that is the proper word and apologies for the error.

[Chester]

So trump is banning Muslims, but why not Saudi Muslims? Pakistani Muslims? Why are those Muslims acceptable? Is it because they have oil or military power or are there other less cynical reasons that I am not aware of?

Nope... this is because he didn't ban Muslims.

Please check your sources and the sources those sources source.

[Bob]

I don't have the exact quote handy, but Trump indicated that christians from those targeted countries would be prioritized over muslims, and, I think that's where he runs into trouble. I think that is separate from the current "pause". I'm at work, but, I'll try to find the quote later(there may be video of him saying it).

I will try and help with this -

What he said (implied) was that people who are proven to be victims of religious persecution will be prioritized over those whose circumstances are otherwise the same. He pointed out that in some cases, this did apply to Christians. Even the FSM has reported on this truth. Horrific persecution, beheadings just for their religion, etc.

Who could possibly have a problem with that?

Also, just because he said that does not mean that will be implemented either by law or an EO. Just like Trump says he believes waterboarding should be used, he also has left the decision to use waterboarding up to the professionals he appointed. Judge the actions and the results (and stay away from judging short term results, especially when those actions and results are gleaned from the FakeStreamMedia (Thanks KiwiElf - that's a perfect term).

Referring to above, the EO that is - in post http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?95705-Trump-s-Executive-Order-Entry-Suspension--aka-by-MSM-as-the-Muslim-Ban--&p=1130943&viewfull=1#post1130943

Section 5 B of the EO - “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.”


(b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State,

in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes,

to the extent permitted by law, to 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.

Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.

By the sound of that, ANY religious MINORITY will be prioritized if they are being persecuted by a MAJORITY - did I read that right? The language looked pretty clear to me.

Apparently MSM (apparently FOX excluded) is having a difficulty as well as some folks in Congress (and an ex-pres) in not being able to read a simple document. Looking at McCains FUND the MILITARY BILL is so frikin convoluted in comparison, it takes a team of lawyers to read it, but he has to get pissy about protection of National Security and the Public? Curious and curiouser.. "LUMOS" REVEAL yourselves...

==update==

TWO fact checkers from the Washington Post and Politico have reported against the rest of the FakeStreamMedia, that this EO is NOT A MUSLIM BAN. (Amazing hearing that from those MSM fact checkers... the SPIN being put out by certain groups is identifying pretty clearly who's whom.. I seriously doubt they realize that..)

ref: Politico.com
ref: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/

[Chester]

Thanks Bob, this would include one of the most persecuted religious group on the planet - the Yazidi (aka Yezides) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yazidis)

[Bob]

Thanks Bob, this would include one of the most persecuted religious group on the planet - the Yazidi (aka Yezides) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yazidis)

Beginning in August 2014, the Yazidis were targeted by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in its campaign to "purify" Iraq and its neighbouring countries of non-Islamist influences. That sure seems like they could qualify, demonstrating persecution. The bulk of the Yazidi population lives in Iraq, where they make up an important minority community.

Image below -

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4d/Defend_International_Reaches_out_to_Yazidis.jpg/1024px-Defend_International_Reaches_out_to_Yazidis.jpg

caption: "Defend International reached out to Yazidi refugees in Iraqi Kurdistan, providing humanitarian aid in December 2014"

[enigma3]

Actually, Karma Ninja, Obama banned refugees from Iraq for a while and Carter banned them from Iran for a short time.

Read today that both Senator Obama and Senator Clinton voted for funds for a border wall with Mexico. Interesting.

[Innocent Warrior]

Well, I started this thread, so, I have to report back that I've found out there is "more to the story".

I follow WikiLeaks on Twitter, and they tweeted out a link to the "Jimmy Dore" show on YouTube:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4FTFB9GDfls

Watch it, he makes reference to an article written by Seth Frantzman that effectively destroys this whole "ban" scenario, and points out the hypocrisy of protesting the "banning" of Muslims from coming here, but NOT protesting the BOMBING of the same people under Obama. Further, the 7 countries named, were named because they were following Obama's template on the issue. You'll see when you watch. I have to admit, good points are made throughout.

Not a fan of Trump..But we were clearly(purposely) uninformed/misinformed (lied to) by media who didn't say these things.

Not a fan of Trump..But this whole thing is clearly a manipulation. That makes me very angry.. Thought I was a little smarter than that. Link to Frantzman article here:https://www.google.com/amp/s/sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/amp/?client=ms-android-metropcs-us

Last thing: If Frantzman can break things down like this, than so could Duff.
He didn't.
Done with VT.

The media is making it ridiculously difficult to comprehend what's really going on, I'm seeing they're either anti or pro Trump and it's difficult to find objective news sources. Lots of changes for the US means lots of changes for other countries and if you're like me, an Aussie with a very limited understanding of your laws etc. it's time consuming and frustrating to keep up with what's happening. I've well and truly warmed to Trump but I still just want to know the truth, whatever it is, so I've been trying to educate myself by listening to both sides and it's too time consuming.

Trump's press secretary said that Trump will be addressing the public directly in that speech he made on Trump's first full day of presidency, because the media is disinforming the public. From now on I'm just going to listen to what Trump and his staff says first and then come to the forum if I want to check anything or gain more understanding, it seems this is the best approach to staying informed now. I've found it helpful to follow Trump on Twitter too, I don't agree with everything he stands for but he doesn't mince words and he clears up misinformation. Wikileaks is excellent, they are honest and objective, they're on nobody's side but the people's and the truth. It's a shame about VT, I held their work in high esteem.

[Bruno]

So trump is banning Muslims, but why not Saudi Muslims? Pakistani Muslims? Why are those Muslims acceptable? Is it because they have oil or military power or are there other less cynical reasons that I am not aware of?

Nope... this is because he didn't ban Muslims.

Please check your sources and the sources those sources source.



Ok but that doesn't answer my question. Saudi's and Pakistani's have been involved in terrorism, especially funding it and they are countries with Muslim majorities so what are the special circumstances that allow them to not be part of The restrictions?

[Bob]

Time to fire Sally Yates, Obama's AG..

Acting Attorney General Sally Yates is standing in outright defiance against President Donald Trump’s executive order, telling Justice Department lawyers not to defend it, according to CNN.

Can President Trump fire Yates, a Barack Obama appointee, as a result?

The answer is yes.

According to CNN, “The White House could choose to fire Yates and install someone who will carry out the administration’s priorities, but it did not immediately respond to a CNN request for comment.” The president did tweet on the topic, though, calling Yates an “Obama AG.”

Obama and Podesta are behind protests apparently it seems.. Never a dull moment in Politics..

Point which is worse tho.. how deep goes the content of the Swamp? I think President Trump is starting to stir the pot to see what surfaces, and damn, he is doing an excellent job getting the floaters to the surface.. IMHO :)

Source: http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/sally-yates-fired-fire-doj-can-donald-trump-acting-attorney-general-ag-muslim-ban-immigration-defend-obama-democrat/

[Chester]

So trump is banning Muslims, but why not Saudi Muslims? Pakistani Muslims? Why are those Muslims acceptable? Is it because they have oil or military power or are there other less cynical reasons that I am not aware of?

Nope... this is because he didn't ban Muslims.

Please check your sources and the sources those sources source.



Ok but that doesn't answer my question. Saudi's and Pakistani's have been involved in terrorism, especially funding it and they are countries with Muslim majorities so what are the special circumstances that allow them to not be part of The restrictions?

Again, because it is not a Muslim ban. It is about the cooperation received by various other Muslim majority countries today with regards to our need to vet (Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Sudan) and/or the degree of instability in a country such as Iraq and Syria and/or the degree to which intelligence agencies know are actively supporting (funding and perhaps more) terrorism such as Iran

Also, consider that if there had been rogue elements that also held positions in various empowered capacities in the US in the past where these same elements had relationships with others from other governments who also were in positions to make things happen... and that these alliances may have been involved in nefarious activities in the past. This may be less the case today. Also consider that there has been a clear statement that additional countries may also go through the same process.

Consider that today, there may be a greater "cooperative" relationship with regards to elements within intelligence, military and police organizations who also demonstrate that reasonable trust should be extended until they might prove otherwise.

Consider the complexity of the world situation with regards to "under the table activities" and how those might be wound down (if they can be... if that is also the goal of the Trump administration as well as the goal of administrations in other countries). Each and every country should be considered independently with regards to anything as serious as this EO.

[turiya]

If one has trouble finding where to go to get some sense of what is transpiring...
A good source to get a good reality-check is from Paul Craig Roberts (http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/)...


https://www.johndenugent.com/images/paul-craig-roberts-banner-march-2016.jpg

The Left Is Self-Destructing (http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/01/30/left-self-destructing-paul-craig-roberts/)
— Paul Craig Roberts
January 30, 2017 | Categories: Articles & Columns
The mindlessness is unbearable. Amnesty International tells us that we must “fight the Muslim ban” because Trump’s bigotry is wrecking lives. Anthony Dimaggio at CounterPunch says Trump should be impeached because his Islamophobia is a threat to the Constitution. This is not to single out these two, as the mindlessness is everywhere among those whose worldview is defined by Identity Politics.

One might think that Amnesty International should be fighting against the Bush/Cheney/Obama regime wars that have produced the refugees by killing and displacing millions of Muslims. For example, the ongoing war that Obama inflicted on Yemen results in the death of one Yemeni child every 10 minutes, according to UNICEF.


Where is Amnesty International?

Clearly America’s wars on Muslims wreck far more lives than Trump’s ban on immigrants. Why the focus on an immigration ban and not on wars that produce refugees? Is it because Obama is responsible for war and Trump for the ban? Is the liberal/progressive/left projecting Obama’s monstrous crimes onto Trump?


Is it that we must hate Trump and not Obama?

Immigration is not a right protected by the US Constitution. Where was Dimaggio when in the name of “the war on terror” the Bush/Obama regime destroyed the civil liberties guaranteed by the US Constitution? If Dimaggio is an American citizen, he should try immigrating to the UK, Germany, or France and see how far he gets.

The easiest and surest way for the Trump administration to stop the refugee problem, not only for the US but also for Europe and the West in general, is to stop the wars against Muslim countries that his predecessors started. The enormous sums of money squandered on gratuitous wars could instead be given to the countries that the US and NATO have destroyed. The simplest way to end the refugee problem is to stop producing refugees. This should be the focus of Trump, Amnesty, and Dimaggio.


Is everyone too busy hating to do anything sensible?
It is very disturbing that the liberal/progressive/left prefers to oppose Trump than to oppose war. Indeed, they want a war on Trump. How does this differ from the Bush/Obama war on Muslims?

The liberal/progressive/left is demonstrating a mindless hatred of the American people and the President that the people chose. This mindless hatred can achieve nothing but the discrediting of an alternative voice and the opening of the future to the least attractive elements of the right-wing.

The liberal/progressive/left will end up discrediting all critics, thereby empowering those to whom the liberal/progressive/left are most opposed.

Paul Craig Roberts (http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/01/30/left-self-destructing-paul-craig-roberts/)


_________________________________

Night of the Liberal Dead
By Mark Dice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48w7d-xSr_A
http://curezone.com/upload/_T_Forums/Turiya_Files_/AVALON/TRUMP/4CHAN_SMILEY_FACE1.png

[DNA]

Here's the link:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/01/28/case-for-impeachment-the-muslim-ban-fiasco/

Good one from Gordon Duff.
Donald Trump has got to go.

Do you understand the root of the refugee problem?
This is a valid question and one that seems to be lost for folks who are looking at this solely as a humanitarian issue in terms of where the refugees should go.
Do you understand the root of the refugee problem, because if you do not I would be more than happy to explain it to you.
You see while the main stream media is beating a pan with a wooden spoon and demanding attention be given to the poor miss-placed refugees who need a home, not a thing was being stated by that same main stream media while the bombs were dropping by the tens of thousands creating this situation.
Where was US sympathy while the bombs were dropping?
Why is the US in Syria? The US was attempting to interfere in Syria long before there was a problem called ISIS. And you have to realize that ISIS was only created after the CIA realized Obama did not want to bloody his hands and out and out invade Syria with US forces.
And you have to realize by now that ISIS was armed and made capable do to the war capable of toppling a Government because they were armed and supplied by none other than the Obama/Hillary/CIA team with good friends John McCain and Lindsey Graham in the senate. The Wikileaks e-mails exposed how Hillary after over throwing Kaddafi moved the weapons from Libya into Iraq to initially arm and help create ISIS. Wikileaks exposes Hillary Clinton Selling Arms to ISIS (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?93843-Wikileaks-exposes-Hillary-Clinton-Selling-Arms-to-ISIS)
So now that we have covered how the Muslim refugee problem was in part created, I now ask you, do you not think they planned for this refugee problem and that they are using this problem to the utmost in terms of destabilizing world governments? We are talking about a refugee problem that is as large as the one created in WWII. http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/world/unhcr-displaced-peoples-report/
You can't tell me that the Obama/Hillary/CIA team didn't know this problem was going to raise it's ugly head. There is a plan in place here for the destabilizing of world Governments so as to bring about the institution of a one world Government via George Soros and company.
For all of the feigned shock and horror the left is displaying on que as instructed by their director the MSM whose producer is the CIA, the left needs to realize they are operating from a limited knowledge base, one that is solely provided by those attempting to inacta machiavelian take over of the world the likes of which have never been seen before.
Trump is attempting to halt the influx of soldiers being brought in to the US for the sole purpose of destabilizing and destroying this country from within. We should be on our hands and knees thanking Trump right now for the horrors he is attempting to minimize.

[NancyV]

Just heard at 9:20 pm EST that Trump has fired Sally Yates! Good move!



Time to fire Sally Yates, Obama's AG..

Acting Attorney General Sally Yates is standing in outright defiance against President Donald Trump’s executive order, telling Justice Department lawyers not to defend it, according to CNN.

Can President Trump fire Yates, a Barack Obama appointee, as a result?

The answer is yes.

According to CNN, “The White House could choose to fire Yates and install someone who will carry out the administration’s priorities, but it did not immediately respond to a CNN request for comment.” The president did tweet on the topic, though, calling Yates an “Obama AG.”

Obama and Podesta are behind protests apparently it seems.. Never a dull moment in Politics..

Point which is worse tho.. how deep goes the content of the Swamp? I think President Trump is starting to stir the pot to see what surfaces, and damn, he is doing an excellent job getting the floaters to the surface.. IMHO :)

Source: http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/sally-yates-fired-fire-doj-can-donald-trump-acting-attorney-general-ag-muslim-ban-immigration-defend-obama-democrat/

[Bob]

After giving the classic "Your're Fired !" statement to Yates, Dana James Boente was put in her place.

Dana James Boente (born February 7, 1954) is the Acting Attorney General of the United States as of January 30, 2017 and was previously the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Early life and education

Boente was born in Illinois in 1954. Boente is a graduate of St. Louis University (B.S.B.A. and M.B.A.) and its School of Law (J.D.). He has lived in Northern Virginia for 29 years.

Career

In 1982, he began his career as a law clerk for Chief U.S. District Judge J. Waldo Ackerman for the Central District of Illinois. Several years later, in 1984, he joined the Tax Division’s Criminal Section as part of the Attorney General’s Honors Program. Boente became an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Fraud Unit of EDVA in 2001.

In December 2012, Boente was appointed by Attorney General Eric Holder to serve as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Louisiana, a position he held until September 2013. He became the Acting U.S. Attorney for EDVA by virtue of the Vacancy Reform Act on September 23, 2013, and served in that position until December 15, 2015.

He was nominated by President Barack Obama on October 8, 2015, and confirmed by the United States Senate on December 15, 2015, as the 60th U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) and was appointed by President Donald Trump as Acting Attorney General on January 30, 2017, after Acting Attorney General Sally Yates was dismissed by Trump earlier that day.

[bluestflame]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CzlDpWiWQAQsATJ.jpg:large

[turiya]

Hannity gives the facts on what the MSM has named, "The Muslim Ban"...


Hannity: Dems, celebs willing to
gamble with American lives
(Published on Jan 30, 2017)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1xSkqkIfLw

[Isserley]

What interests me now after I saw Bill's analogy is - does the four ‘stages’ in granting rights apply to all situations regarding 7 muslim countries?
There is no question whether one should grant the privilege or right for them to enter US, the question is: who gave the right to US to destroy someone's house/country?
Of all countries - US has the least right to put bann on anyone.
To preserve the security of US in this way - especially when encouraging wars and fears, createing new victims trough Middle East - it is not surprising that the victims have no choice but to illegally flee how and where who gets..
If everyone had Trump's way of thinking - the refugees would have been condemned to unimaginable suffering, which is not so far from the truth ..

When Trump do something in the direction of cessation of creating new terrorists, and consequently new victims (which has been by far the most important policy of the US all these years) then I might start to think differently of Trumps actions

I apologize for potential errors - English is obviously not my native language

[Bruno]

I am saddened by the excuses being made for Trump on here. So much hate and fear. What is this ban saving anyone from? What a hornet nest. Liberal media bias and the atrocities committed by Obama and his government do not excuse laws that have no basis in reality! Trump is not a savior, just as Obama was not a savior.

With each passing day I see our humanity slipping away. I quite literally feel sick this morning.

[Innocent Warrior]

Bruno, politics isn't worth feeling sick about. There's so much more to life and humanity than the political systems or even the whole world. This is all insignificant when looking at the bigger picture of life and reality, don't let it get you down.

[Chester]

I am saddened by the excuses being made for Trump on here. So much hate and fear. What is this ban saving anyone from? What a hornet nest. Liberal media bias and the atrocities committed by Obama and his government do not excuse laws that have no basis in reality! Trump is not a savior, just as Obama was not a savior.

With each passing day I see our humanity slipping away. I quite literally feel sick this morning.

I also felt sick when I began to realize how other Americans and other folks from other parts of the world were playing a direct role in creating the very situations that resulted in folks fleeing their countries for their lives when many if not most would far have preferred otherwise.

Truly sickening.

Now, if one agrees with what I just wrote, are they also aware of the complicated situation that has been implemented over the last 20 or so years with regards to this situation today - a situation where many wish this situation would "change" (for the better)? If so, how would one do that?

Let me use an analogy. You and a friend are riding your bikes and you have an accident. In the process of falling, you fall on a piece of broken glass which severs a significant vein or artery of one of your arms or legs. Your friend comes to your aid. What does that friend do? They might swiftly remove their shirt and rip it apart so as to create something that could be used to tie off the rapid blood loss, yes? If they are successful, their action may have saved your life by preventing you from bleeding to death.

But is that where any medical care ends? Your friend grabs their cellphone and calls 911. A paramedic team arrives and likely replaces your tie off with an improved, safer and hygienically clean tourniquet. If you live you will likely obtain further medical treatment, some of which may be long term so that you might recover from the accident fully.

The actions taken by the Trump administration are an attempt to tie off the danger first. Has this gone smoothly? Nope. Was there any preparation with regards to how best (from a PR standpoint) this should be rolled out? Nope but perhaps this is actually a plus because how does PR come anywhere near the obvious threat? Were there mistakes made even in the wording of the EO? In my opinion, yes... specifically with regards to the "green card" wording.

But let me ask you, what if your friend hesitated? What if they were concerned their shirt... full of sweat and who knows what other potential contaminants, might cause you an infection? And so they waited to act.

So I ask you... if you found yourself bleeding to death on the road, would you be worried you might get an infection? Would you prefer waiting for the paramedic?

So then... what if you died and went to a place you could look back upon the event? Would you think that perhaps it may have been wiser to act immediately even though there's some sloppiness and/or risk with the choice? Which risk is greater? The risk of death or a risk of infection?

Do you think if you asked the families of the folks killed in all the various terrorist attacks all across the world would agree it has been far more important to take the policy risks their governments have taken (look at Germany for example) than to expect their governments to take serious measures to keep their citizens safe?

Do you think inconveniencing some folks is in any way anywhere near as important as keeping folks safe?

Does anyone think that if each and every country actually took measures to keep their citizens safe that eventually the causes of these situations would be isolated and that whatever were the actual underlying causes (wink, wink) they would be forced into coming to the surface? Imagine if each and every country would take on "terrorism" both internally (the potential covert actors behind much of this activity) while simultaneously taking on the external, overt actions of terrorists and their underlying networks?

This is the strategy I would use. And if the internal (covert) causes could be eradicated quietly without unnecessary fallout, that to me makes most sense. But hey, I am just a poster on a single forum so who am I to have any clue?

[abmqa]

So trump is banning Muslims, but why not Saudi Muslims? Pakistani Muslims? Why are those Muslims acceptable? Is it because they have oil or military power or are there other less cynical reasons that I am not aware of?

Nope... this is because he didn't ban Muslims.

Please check your sources and the sources those sources source.



Ok but that doesn't answer my question. Saudi's and Pakistani's have been involved in terrorism, especially funding it and they are countries with Muslim majorities so what are the special circumstances that allow them to not be part of The restrictions?

It's not a "Muslim ban".... wink wink nod nod... because doing so would be illegal. Let Rudy Giuliani (such a reprehensible human being) explain it to you here... smh...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2k11QQW0g

[TargeT]

Do you think if you asked the families of the folks killed in all the various terrorist attacks all across the world would agree it has been far more important to take the policy risks their governments have taken (look at Germany for example) than to expect their governments to take serious measures to keep their citizens safe?

Do you think inconveniencing some folks is in any way anywhere near as important as keeping folks safe?

I'd wager the average American is one of the most educated, most informed inhabitant on this planet, comparatively & by modern definitions.


By my own personal definitions of "education" and "being informed" (based on observations of how one achieves those qualities currently) I'd say we are the most indoctrinated & most predictable as well, I'd say the average citizen's working political memory is 2 years or so, maybe less... so what you are pondering here is literally beyond their means with out some form of guidance or alternate education effort.




Imagine if each and every country would take on "terrorism" both internally (the potential covert actors behind much of this activity) while simultaneously taking on the external, overt actions of terrorists and their underlying networks?

So you're not inclined to think that "Terrorism" is caused BY (or at least facilitated by) those very entities you would call on to stop it?

Terrorism is a tool of the state (not always the one that is currently in charge, but often..)


your seeing through it, but what you propose is exactly what a lot of (US) citizens think is being done currently. With that in mind, I don't think the solution will ever come from governments, not in their current forms.

¤=[Post Update]=¤






So trump is banning Muslims, but why not Saudi Muslims? Pakistani Muslims? Why are those Muslims acceptable? Is it because they have oil or military power or are there other less cynical reasons that I am not aware of?

Nope... this is because he didn't ban Muslims.

Please check your sources and the sources those sources source.

Ok but that doesn't answer my question. Saudi's and Pakistani's have been involved in terrorism, especially funding it and they are countries with Muslim majorities so what are the special circumstances that allow them to not be part of The restrictions?

It's not a "Muslim ban".... wink wink nod nod... because doing so would be illegal. Let Rudy Giuliani (such a reprehensible human being) explain it to you here... smh...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2k11QQW0g

It's a list of 7 countries the Obama administration had already been putting severe restrictions on. (no one cared when he did it...haha)

Obama & his cabinet didn't include Pakistan nor Saudi... that's why they aren't on the list.



What is this ban saving anyone from? .

THIS:
SP2GiB4sJrM

THIS:
-dlXPNZU7vY

This:
iF-SjHuOTOM

this:
Lq84ZTm3fAE

I could literally post thousands of these..


and you DO NOT want me to get into the child rape stuff (or adult rape) that's enough right there...

sdGPPLmR5Bc


I'm not even sure how you could even ask that question.

[abmqa]

I'd wager the average American is one of the most educated, most informed inhabitant on this planet, comparatively & by modern definitions.

By my own personal definitions of "education" and "being informed" (based on observations of how one achieves those qualities currently) I'd say we are the most indoctrinated & most predictable as well, I'd say the average citizen's working political memory is 2 years or so, maybe less... so what you are pondering here is literally beyond their means with out some form of guidance or alternate education effort.

I'd say the average American is the most self entitled, self involved and most immersed into corporate sponsored entertainment on the planet!

This is as intended. They (the powers that currently exist) do not want a well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking to become too large. Do not be fooled by the number of people we see here...they are the critical thinkers, these are exceptions ... they are the ones who do not have their minds glazed with systematic propaganda. Sadly these are the extreme minority in this country, as intended.

That said, I am very encouraged to see the number protesters in the US and the world. I feel it sends a much needed message to the current power structure. We are watching you and we will speak up!!

[Chester]

So you're not inclined to think that "Terrorism" is caused BY (or at least facilitated by) those very entities you would call on to stop it?

Terrorism is a tool of the state (not always the one that is currently in charge, but often..)

your seeing through it, but what you propose is exactly what a lot of (US) citizens think is being done currently. With that in mind, I don't think the solution will ever come from governments, not in their current forms.


I did my best to word my post in a way that would clarify my view, part of which is based on my hope.

I will clarify better.

It is my opinion, in large part based on my observation of the world as it has come forth in the last several decades (if not for centuries and even millennia), that state actors (whether known to the public or not) have manipulated these situations such that, for example, terrorism happens and that the terrorism plays out so that the masses "buy" hook line and sinker" that the entire reason we are experiencing these events is based on the puppet/perpetrator. Note I have to use both words because they both apply. Folks like you and I, Target, know these perps are puppeteered. But (still) far to many of the masses can only see them as perps because they cannot fathom that elements within their own particular government and nation could possibly be behind these events.

Yet also, it is my hope, based on what I am observing not just in America but in the UK and now starting to spring up in so many movements developing in other countries that the very thing that David Icke, for example, has already stated as the critical thing that has to happen - that being a consciousness shift is actually starting to occur. And we know that for this shift to occur, it must be proceeded by a wake up. I see more and more the waking up. It is my opinion that Brexit, DTJ, the recent vote in Italy and all the movements which are showing a new guard is stepping in is proof of the waking up.

Now, it is logical to me that some of the folks who are in various governments are also part of these same awakening masses. If this is actually the case then not only would reform come from the outside, it would also have the opportunity to spring forth on an individual basis, one by one, from segments within the inside.

It is my hope and belief that DTJ wishes to see the world change for all for the better. It seems quite logical that if this is his honest, true desire that he would also empanel a team around him who also shared this same desire. It also makes sense to me that he would have "bridges" on the team to "the other side"... and I do not mean democrat vs republican, I mean "the old guard" (and many other words I could use that would point to what I mean) which spans all parties, all agencies, all branches of government, business, etc. It would also make sense to me that if any individual "bridge" demonstrates their interests are more to protect the old guard than to fulfill Trump's (and much of the world's) desire to be free of the old ways and the old guard's iron rule, then that individual will be marginalized or replaced.

So to summarize, it is my hope and my operational assumption for now, that DTJ and team desire that terrorism would be eliminated as a tool of the state, at least as far as it goes with US overtly observed state actors promulgating this as well as US covert state actors (as revealed by various leaks, but known to be real by many and for a long, long time). This may also create the example other countries might observe that gives them the strength and opportunity for their governments to clean up their act as well - a big task indeed, perhaps a dream too fantastic to reach for... but I hold to this hope and it is surely my desire that true change finally becomes a reality not just for our children, but for generations to come.

If we conclude that all forms of government will always use the tool of covertly creating terrorism (and all sorts of other forms of destabilization) then it is my opinion we are toast anyways and its just a matter of time before we self destruct or worse, become eternally enslaved with no hope for escape. So like DJT said to the impoverished communities in the inner cities, "What do you have to lose?"

I believe true change can happen. I have many data points that support my belief. The most important one is that it is getting harder and harder for the bad actors to get away with faking us out. As long as this trend continues, I hold hope true change has a real chance.

[Chester]

That said, I am very encouraged to see the number protesters in the US and the world. I feel it sends a much needed message to the current power structure. We are watching you and we will speak up!!

What will be great is when we see these protestors wake up to how they have been manipulated into protesting fiction and dark fantasy by the ones they should actually be protesting (like Soros for example) instead of allowing themselves to be incited by the organizations funded by folks like Soros and who are working hand in hand with sold out politicians on all sides of the isle.

¤=[Post Update]=¤



It's not a "Muslim ban".... wink wink nod nod... because doing so would be illegal. Let Rudy Giuliani (such a reprehensible human being) explain it to you here... smh...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2k11QQW0g

...and this is why Giuliani is not on the team, my friend.

[abmqa]

That said, I am very encouraged to see the number protesters in the US and the world. I feel it sends a much needed message to the current power structure. We are watching you and we will speak up!!

What will be great is when we see these protestors wake up to how they have been manipulated into protesting fiction and dark fantasy by the ones they should actually be protesting (like Soros for example) instead of allowing themselves to be incited by the organizations funded by folks like Soros and who are working hand in hand with sold out politicians on all sides of the isle.

¤=[Post Update]=¤



It's not a "Muslim ban".... wink wink nod nod... because doing so would be illegal. Let Rudy Giuliani (such a reprehensible human being) explain it to you here... smh...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2k11QQW0g

...and this is why Giuliani is not on the team, my friend.

I am surprised but, I assure you I am extremely happy and thankful that trump did not choose him for the team.


Uh oh. Just learned that Rudy is now on the team...SMH :angry:

[Adi]

Just wanted to drop a note while I'm reading trough these comments. The level of insight and well formulated statements from some forum members is, for me, very reassuring and intelligent talk on such important global issues. Keep up the good work guys.

Adi

[Tangri]

Starting at min. 1:50





"Having said that, I have not studied that Koran, so I rely on the word of authority here (Sam Harris), which is often a slippery slope.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwWXEV7MHgc

Hi Tangri,
My initial comment was directed at the scripture of the Islam religion and not so much as what has and is being done in the name of religion.

I'm well aware of the horrible things that was done under the banner of the catholic church, but then we are discussing something else entirely.

I specifically meant what is being advocated through the religions scripture, on which religions are based.

In any case, I'd better not have made that comment about Islam to begin with, since it adds little to the story line of this thread.


Well, I started this thread, so, I have to report back that I've found out there is "more to the story".

I follow WikiLeaks on Twitter, and they tweeted out a link to the "Jimmy Dore" show on YouTube:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4FTFB9GDfls

Watch it, he makes reference to an article written by Seth Frantzman that effectively destroys this whole "ban" scenario, and points out the hypocrisy of protesting the "banning" of Muslims from coming here, but NOT protesting the BOMBING of the same people under Obama. Further, the 7 countries named, were named because they were following Obama's template on the issue. You'll see when you watch. I have to admit, good points are made throughout.

Not a fan of Trump..But we were clearly(purposely) uninformed/misinformed (lied to) by media who didn't say these things.


Thanks for the link to that Jimmy Dore show Sean.
Very clear analyses of the situation and manipulations going on.

I think we may expect much of more of these kind of media manipulations in the times to come, since the media in the US is still clustered in 6 large companies, thus centralized and therefore a propaganda mouthpiece for the ones who control those 6 companies.


Hi Eram,
There were a lot of words to explain the situation, I just want to show your expert's psychobable hypothessis contradicts with history. Of course all religions for humanity's sake, not only one part of the specific race, but in reality bad seeds manipulate them.

First of all, for this thread(not to your post)

Executive order is not a " muslim Ban"
It is a temporary halt order for Obama's last minute recall from his agression occured geografic areas -7 countries. (not all Muslim countries for now) He was trying to recall all his collaraberators -agents. In Trump's sake; those people, it is a potantial threat for his administration , who can be manupilated easily , for covert-black operations in future.

Most Americans and Europians do not know how American visas given by American Embassies. Iraq , Yemen, Somali, Sudan, Syria , Libya ( I am not including Iran for specific reason) it is almost imposible to have turistic visas for regular person. For those lucky (!) people, must get through very detailed screening by embassy CIA desks.

Trump's act is just to stop his old government's dark trushes, coming his own backyard

Mass media trying to turn it to the circus show. and unfortunately Alternative media fell in trap on this. This is not Democrats versa Repuclicans subject and definitely is not a Muslim Ban.

Still there are alot of words to write it down but I am not sure if readers ready to swallow.

[bluestflame]

just observe how mainstream media plays it , engage the emotions , critical thinking skills tend to take a back seat

[pyrangello]

And the Yazidis were chased to a mountain by ISIl with no food or water ,some 40-50,000 . Heres a link to the following events https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinjar_massacre

[Tangri]

just observe how mainstream media plays it , engage the emotions , critical thinking skills tend to take a back seat

:inlove:

Sometimes it has limits to stay in silence.

[Bob]

For those trying to grasp the propaganda put into the consciousness matrix by Fake Stream Media (MSM) which is fueling the "riots" and other madness.. being pushed to do so by (?)

Hervé has a great post I think everyone on this forum could enjoy reading. It is now my most favorite post of the year too (Thanks for pointing that out Sam !)

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94731-Fake-News-and-the-War-on-Freedom-and-Truth&p=1129627&viewfull=1#post1129627 <--- this is the post on the thread "Fake News and the War on Freedom and Truth"

[Chester]

Uh oh. Just learned that Rudy is now on the team...SMH :angry:

An advisor is one thing, being empowered to speak for Trump and the team is another. He's always been an advisor with Trump. That doesn't mean Trump acts on his sole advice. The world is not black and white.

I simply recommend waiting and watching and perhaps, at least give the whole new set of possibilities a chance. Judge it all by the results. Well... this is at least what I have decided to do. But I ask, isn't that what its really all about?

[Chester]

Thanks for your posts, Tangri, I hope to read more, very interesting suggestions and views.

[Tangri]

Thanks for your posts, Tangri, I hope to read more, very interesting suggestions and views.

Well Sam ,

I can give you only dats. I have writen on Pentagon- CIA authorization conflict. Current recall is a threat for that balance in US soil.( other words over my pay grade.)

[Hervé]

Dear good people of the "Book," check this post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?86384-Here-The-So-called-Word-Of-God&p=1131232&viewfull=1#post1131232) (<---) to get an idea of where it all came from, what's being done, etc., keeping in mind that those occult "rulers"/high priests think in terms of "generations" in implementing their schemes and strategies.

[Bob]

Dear good people of the "Book," check this post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?86384-Here-The-So-called-Word-Of-God&p=1131232&viewfull=1#post1131232) (<---) to get an idea of where it all came from, what's being done, etc., keeping in mind that those occult "rulers"/high priests think in terms of "generations" in implementing their schemes and strategies.

Yes I had read that thread yesterday also Hervé, my question on a few threads (unanswered so far 'cept for this possible) is who are the deep embedded "rulers".. Knowing them, the quantum hold can be un-wound. Tnx..

[TargeT]

.. Knowing them, the quantum hold can be un-wound. Tnx..

everything else is a bit of a distraction ;)

not knowing who is guiding this (knowing their motivations is even better, but those can at least be guessed at )"society" movement that seems to have been going on for thousands of years now (too long for human motivation,).

We can infer a lot about motivation and a possible "who" by analyzing history and looking for anomalous actions that do not fit the typical human behavior (self aggrandizing, immediate gain from the ambitious ones, far shorter term survival for the less so, etc..).

at least that's what I try to do, still don't have a good solid answer ;)

[Hervé]

Dear good people of the "Book," check this post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?86384-Here-The-So-called-Word-Of-God&p=1131232&viewfull=1#post1131232) (<---) to get an idea of where it all came from, what's being done, etc., keeping in mind that those occult "rulers"/high priests think in terms of "generations" in implementing their schemes and strategies.

Yes I had read that thread yesterday also Hervé, my question on a few threads (unanswered so far 'cept for this possible) is who are the deep embedded "rulers".. Knowing them, the quantum hold can be un-wound. Tnx..That's whoever thinks/believes they are "better," superior and more successful at bullying than anyone else around and longs for an ever lasting control over those pesky humans who are out to get 'em. In short, that's your run-of-the-mill psychopath... "inspired" by "otherworldly" influence as was Plato and which leads back to Truman's experience in his "Eye of Ra" book and/or to Alex Collier's "Orion Model (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?46424-Incarceration-as-a-form-of-vengeance&p=507187&viewfull=1#post507187)."

On the other hand, how does one as an individual or a collective, radicalizes someone into, or de-radicalizes someone out of, a fanatic?

Like with this guy:


English football fan jailed for pushing Pole he mistook for Russian onto train tracks (VIDEO) (http://trueviralnews.com/english-football-fan-jailed-for-pushing-pole-he-mistook-for-russian-onto-train-tracks-video/)... which means there is a more fundamental programming of the human collective unconscious that's being triggered and tapped into and directed against whatever is the designated ailment of the day.

Hint:

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."
William Casey (CIA Director), February 1981 (https://www.quora.com/Did-William-Casey-CIA-Director-really-say-Well-know-our-disinformation-program-is-complete-when-everything-the-American-public-believes-is-false).

[Tangri]

.. Knowing them, the quantum hold can be un-wound. Tnx..

everything else is a bit of a distraction ;)

not knowing who is guiding this (knowing their motivations is even better, but those can at least be guessed at )"society" movement that seems to have been going on for thousands of years now (too long for human motivation,).

We can infer a lot about motivation and a possible "who" by analyzing history and looking for anomalous actions that do not fit the typical human behavior (self aggrandizing, immediate gain from the ambitious ones, far shorter term survival for the less so, etc..).

at least that's what I try to do, still don't have a good solid answer ;)

You are right.

But, when you feel that it is not fit our current belief , you are looking teachings with christianity, judist or islamic fundamentals. Those religions for (Herve's wording ) good people of the book. There are some teachings(zionism, cabalism) are not for general population, their teaching for ruling the rest, every new born gets an extra cirriculum for their education, they groom in that way and they behave (motivated) different than mass population.

Yes, you are also right; there are other people who does and not fit human criteria but this is not arguable because of food chain(interest)variances , there are other creatures( some one can call them transhumans-not technological) who has food chain conflict with in them.
Of course this is belong to another thread's subject:blushing:

[Chester]

L.A. federal judge orders a temporary halt to part of Trump's travel ban
(http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-federal-order-travel-ban-20170201-story.html)

The article gives a different impression than the reality. I won't quote the article here.

I will provide the link to the actual order -

Read the federal judge’s temporary restraining order against Trump’s travel ban
(http://documents.latimes.com/read-federal-judges-temporary-restraining-order-against-trumps-travel-ban/)

EDIT (added several hours after this post was submitted): I've intentionally not commented on this yet thinking that some folks would. The order is very brief and very clear. Anyone have a comment?

[Innocent Warrior]

I've well and truly warmed to Trump

Sooo, feeling pretty chilly today after reading Trump's tweet (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/827002559122567168) about Australia.

"Do you believe it?"

Nope.

"The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia."

Bulls**t, they'd be legitimate refugees.

"Why?"

An invalid question since you called them illegal immigrants.

"I will study this dumb deal!"

Genius. Hot tip - study first, tweet later.

Donald Trump ‘upset and angry’ over refugee deal discussed with Malcolm Turnbull (http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a)

https://media.giphy.com/media/ToMjGpjpXMFPshSYGLm/giphy.gif

Ah well, at least this puts a global spotlight on the shameful treatment of the asylum seekers, hopefully our government will finally be forced to treat them like human beings.

[Chester]

I have learned to translate Trump tweets, by looking at the actions and then recreating his words to make better sense of what he actually means... that's the only way I am able to "understand" and "get" what he's trying to do.

I am nobody so its sorta silly for me to pick apart what's so far happened but if I rated the creation of this specific order (and what it covered) and the rollout I would rate the former a 6 (on a 1 to 10) and the rollout a 2. I personally believe the order itself could have been better thought through thus improved in a way each sub group within the larger group of visa holders could have been handled far better with regards to their specific sub group's circumstances.

The PR aspect of the rollout seemed ignored though I sense the administration now wishes they would have thought this through as well which if they had perhaps they would have avoided most of the fallout.

The CA judges action (to me) seems quite merited.

This was disappointing for me, I expected better.

[Chester]

I've well and truly warmed to Trump

Sooo, feeling pretty chilly today after reading Trump's tweet (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/827002559122567168) about Australia.


Ah well, at least this puts a global spotlight on the shameful treatment of the asylum seekers, hopefully our government will finally be forced to treat them like human beings.

Yes... this one also makes me feel pretty chilly. The actions and words (tweets) remind me of someone who is trying to get too much done, too fast... and is making mistakes for this reason. I know many a business people who sometimes get into this type of operational mode.

But this involves the lives of human beings... one matters, all more than a 1,000 matter. This particular situation is complex because who could argue that Australia's "policy" is... relative to much of the "western world" seems a bit odd. Enjoy the perks of being a "western nation" in "the club" yet have a policy that refuses to take true refugees that actually survive to make it to your land that contributes on par with perhaps your most important western ally, the United States?

BUT!

For the (US) President to handle the matter as he did is, for me, not what I expect from my President.

First, you can certainly communicate with Prime Minister Turnbull something like this... "Hey, you and I both know that the November deal... (yes, I know it has been discussed for months) was one of a good dozen lovely "goodbye kisses" left by my predecessor and certainly a deal he knows I would never agree to... but a deal is a deal. Yet, as all deals, until the deal actually happens, its still not a done deal so... and I am not saying I am backing out of the deal, but listen, friend, we have far bigger fish to fry and also, if I am not mistaken, you have China knocking on your back door now. I have no doubt you wish for our full support in watching your back so hey... let's make this a win - win for both of us by our acceptance of the refugees who God knows most of them are true refugees, but understand we really need to do our own stricter vetting and for two reasons.

One, because this is coming up at a time the US is stepping up our own vetting procedures so how would it look if the we just wave these folks in? So we have to do the new screening procedures which, as you likely know are under development for the next 90 or so days but also, we have to do this (two) because it is known that among this particular group is a high likelihood there's some potentially dangerous folks and we're not going to gamble any more with the safety and lives of the American people. So the key here is that you give me your word Australia will join in, with the goal of reaching a proportion of refugees as we are taking in in the US by alter your "no refugee" policy and join the rest of the western world in participating in this humanitarian effort by committing to assisting your fair share. Vet them... vet them heavily... but commit to your fair share just like the US, even after my cut in the number of refugees we'll be taking in in 2017 (50,000)."

That's what I would have said... EDIT added: ... on the spot at that time with my limited knowledge of Australia's situation. I have done a bit more research and thus may have not said some of the above after all. See my post #122 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?95705-Trump-s-Executive-Order-Entry-Suspension--aka-by-MSM-as-the-Muslim-Ban--&p=1131823&viewfull=1#post1131823)

For some background - read this (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/02/heres-what-the-dumb-deal-on-refugees-with-australia-actually-says/?utm_term=.832ff72d49c6) (but also beware - its WAPO - a known fake news site... though this article seems based in some truth)

Note: a swap deal would not address any other or future similar situations.

[Innocent Warrior]

Yes... this one also makes me feel pretty chilly. The actions and words (tweets) remind me of someone who is trying to get too much done, too fast... and is making mistakes for this reason. I know many a business people who sometimes get into this type of operational mode.

But this involves the lives of human beings... one matters, all more than a 1,000 matter. This particular situation is complex because who could argue that Australia's "policy" is... relative to much of the "western world" seems a bit odd. Enjoy the perks of being a "western nation" in "the club" yet have a policy that refuses to take true refugees that actually survive to make it to your land that contributes on par with perhaps your most important western ally, the United States?

Yes, it involves 1,250 refugees (not thousands). I personally don't care about Australia being a part of the club or see that we've had much of a choice but yes, good point about our policies, I think most Aussies agree with you. To be fair, it's a difficult situation because of the people smugglers involved with asylum seekers arriving on boats but Turnbull's policies, which are designed to send a strong message, punish innocent people and they've been treated poorly at the centres (the camps are shutting down but I just read that they're still there atm).


read this (but also beware - its WAPO - a known fake news site... this article seems based in some truth)

This is a bit more informative - https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/02/qa-what-is-the-australian-refugee-deal-and-why-has-it-angered-trump

I don't believe anything that Trump supposedly said without proof btw. I also think we should take the refugees ourselves and New Zealand, God love them, has offered to help us too. My only issue is with Trump's tweet, he's not on a reality TV show anymore, he's the POTUS, like I said - a bull in a china shop.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

He did warn us that he would win so much, it would make us tired of winning. ;)

Trump is an epic troll, and I say that in a very affectionate way towards him. He also has a long and well-known reputation for being an expert on keeping people off-balance during negotiations by doing unexpected things for leverage.

Personally I think many western countries have gone above and beyond whatever humanitarian charity we think we owe the rest of the world. In reality all of the major "charities" are just facilitating all the black-budget stuff like human trafficking and organ harvesting. The refugees that are intentionally being run to our countries by globalists, running them out of Syria and northern Africa and other places, are in order to sway the voting block towards the globalists who got them there in the first place. This is how they override national sovereignty and eventually start replacing laws and governments with their own.

That might not be a huge problem in Australia yet but it is in Germany, where the Secretary of State for the city of Berlin is in favor of Sharia Law for the general public of Germany. Britain has also seen political movements from their increasing Muslim communities. This is common sense stuff. There have always been limits historically on the number of migrants allowed into developed countries, no matter what color they are or what their reason for fleeing is. If I were a homeless man on the street I would have no more right to be entitled to a free 5-star hotel room than I would any homeless shelter, and developed nations have no greater responsibility to take disadvantaged people than these peoples' own neighbors in the Middle East, in countries such as Saudi Arabia or Turkey which are supposedly our allies.

I would support legislation that says, if people want to bring over refugees, that's no problem. But the catch is, people must volunteer to house them and feed them theirselves. That way if you want to take in a bunch of refugees, you won't overburden the rest of the population with your propensity to give away the work of American taxpayers, because you will only be able to take in the number that your great generosity will allow you to take. Or organize community charities to do it. But don't make the burden of an indebted government that can't even keep its own homeless fed and sheltered.

[sunwings]

Trump just got put in his place!

BORoTQ4Y8cU

[Chester]

More info about Australia - and why I should stay away from commenting before I have better researched the situation... look at Australia's location.

If Australia had a more lax policy with regards to "refugees" they would be exposed to a.) the "pretend" refugees that are smuggled into the "refugee population" trying to reach Australia by boat which has become a true black market industry. In far too many cases, some of these "pretend refugees" are career criminals and worse.

But b.) the most obvious reality is the 100s of thousands of potential refugees within a realistic distance to Australia's shores who would suddenly pour in at a rate Australia would literally be overrun.

Australia has their own "natural wall" - the oceans and seas. But when an illegal alien somehow arrives on their shores the Australian authorities ship them off to one of their remote islands. This policy was implemented based on the view that if it is known that coming to Australia illegally results in being sent to interment camps on remote islands, that would slow this type of traffic way, way down and apparently it has.

All the above I have gathered from the conversations I have had with some of my Australian friends since yesterday. I may have some or all of it wrong or grossly characterized but I did my best to get it right.

[Chester]

Tammy Bruce: How Trump Strengthens National Security

Tammy explains exactly why the seven countries were singled out and should be listened to by anyone who wishes to express their opinion on Trump's Travel Suspension EO.

sL9bzwQoqOE

This video also explains why "the left" has been so "riled up." The leaders and "involved" players of the left understand that if Trump wins on shutting down the trend of the last eight (and perhaps more) years, which this order sets a precedent in doing... their political party "the Democrats" are soon "toast" and it will be forever. They will never recover because too many Americans will experience too much "winning."

Toast... buttered on both sides with some jam slammed on top, consumed by the new reality that no one will ever wish to let go of for decades at least.

[boolacalaca]

Regarding refugees from war-torn and terrorist states, the courts, and the Executive Order ban for 90 days, here's part of a message I sent to the White House:

"I would like to make a suggestion. If the courts block your Executive Order regarding refugees from war-torn or terrorist states, then why not establish an Ellis Island type of facility in which the refugees would be temporarily held until they could be vetted. This was standard practice at the beginning of the 20th Century. The refugees could go through medical exams, biometric scanning, and other vetting procedures. As was done a hundred years ago, only when they had passed all required processes would they then be released into the country. How could the courts object to this -- especially when Ellis Island has historical significance as the place where refugees from Europe were successfully processed."

[BMJ]

This policy was implemented based on the view that if it is known that coming to Australia illegally results in being sent to interment camps on remote islands, that would slow this type of traffic way, way down and apparently it has.

The period of detention can be very lengthy, and that in itself is a major deterrent, which helps reduce the number of illegals coming into the country.

Immigration detention times on Nauru and Manus Island blow out to 450-day average under Liberals
Link: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-13/immigration-detention-times-blow-out-to-almost-450-days/7085264

BACK TO TOPIC.

[Chester]

Hi, boolacalaca, as for aviation related ports of entry go, they have a pretty solid system for processing everyone already. I would imagine that a high percentage of folks traveling from (or citizens of) one of those seven countries are arriving at airports. Clearly to create a new "Ellis Island" would cause an even greater backlash - especially among the unhinged. And then there would be the cost, also clearly unjustifiable.


Anyways, I, personally, like the way this whole matter is playing out. I like the ruling by the US Federal District Judge in Washington. I like that the Trump administration swiftly appealed the ruling (considering the points provided from the "AGless" US Justice Department). I like that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower courts ruling and held that the appeal as submitted did not make a constitutionally sound argument for "a stay."

It will be interesting to see what may be submitted in the next 24 hours... as there's a short window where the Trump administration can make further arguments to the 9th Circuit Court.

But all this brings everything out in the open, allows for each side to make their arguments and then allows the Trump administration an opportunity for the Supreme Court to rule on the matter.

So much has been exposed by this particular EO. Just to name a few of these... -

To me, the most obvious thing exposed is how clear it is that so much of the US's entire immigration and visitor system is broken AND/OR that viable laws already on the books have been unenforced entirely or selectively enforced to a very small degree.

It brings to the public the reality that with regards to certain nations, the ability to perform a reasonable level of vetting that results in a reasonable level of confidence that folks in the US are safe with regards to who is being allowed in (initially legally) is either almost impossible or completely impossible with the exceptions where individuals have worked with the US military, with US agencies and/or with US diplomats. Big mistake in not having those folks issued exceptions when the original EO was signed and implemented. I consider this one of the problems with "the green card fiasco" but this was not the only problem. It would have made sense that current green card holders (of these 7 countries) be prioritized and that a temporary additional "interview" process be implemented and in cases where reasonable doubt may exist with regards to the validity of existing support documentation perhaps additional follow up requirements be developed and that the individual would be informed yet still allowed in (or back in) without undue delay and without causing undue family and/or employment hardship.

It is my guess that a combination of "hurry up" resulted in a pretty terrible roll out. It is my guess that Trump's thinking was that despite the obvious lack of "thinking this all through" he may have decided there would be far more risk if he did not begin to follow through on his promise to "Keep America Safe Again." He also may have foreseen the current situation - anyone who knows the US court system knows that all you need is a liberal judge within a district of a liberal appeals court to have anything blocked where the only alternative and eventual result a conservative may desire will be decided by the US Supreme Court.

Another positive is that Trump can claim (at least among his supporters) that he needed his own AG confirmed from day one.

All of this will be used to do what I make odds 90% certain will happen. That all this negativity will be used as excuses by enough Senate Democrats to ensure Gorsuch does not achieve 60 votes. The US senate will be forced to use the nuclear option which will subsequently ensure that as long as Trump gets at least one other retiree in the next two years, if the House and Senate remain held by conservatives in 2018 then four years and if this continues to be conservative majorities... possibly eight, the US Supreme Court will end up with a 6 - 3 or perhaps even 7 - 2 conservative leaning makeup, it will be seen by many that Trump did the single most important thing a US President can do and that is the structuring of the US Supreme Court - a structuring that will greatly impact at least two generations.

In my opinion, everything comes down to the makeup of the US Supreme Court when Trump leaves office.

[boolacalaca]

Hi, boolacalaca, as for aviation related ports of entry go, they have a pretty solid system for processing everyone already. I would imagine that a high percentage of folks traveling from (or citizens of) one of those seven countries are arriving at airports. Clearly to create a new "Ellis Island" would cause an even greater backlash - especially among the unhinged. And then there would be the cost, also clearly unjustifiable.



Hi Sam -- I should have been more clear. I meant employing an Ellis Island type of processing. I didn't mean establishing one location to do this like Ellis Island. If the airports alone had a "solid system" for doing this already, then why would there be an issue over the need for increased vetting or need for the 90-day hiatus? I don't believe the basic airport screening of visas and passports is what Trump is talking about when he asks for better vetting. How does that ensure the refugee doesn't have a communicable disease, for example? The federal government has plenty of resources and facilities near major cities and their airports to handle the subset of people who would need extra screening. And since most refugees, I suspect, take the shortest flight from the middle east, most of them arrive on the east coast, which would also narrow down how many facilities would be required. As far as creating a greater backlash, ANYTHING that Trump does will trigger the snowflakes into fits of hysteria. He can't be worried or intimidated by that. By virtual of the fact these people are described as unhinged, anything sensible would be anathema to them. And as far as the cost, if the extra vetting forestalls terrorist attacks and the deaths of innocent people, I think the marginal financial cost is justified. If the US can spend hundreds of billions on defense, then diverting a small portion of funds into this temporary program is worth the safety it would provide. An ounce of prevention instead of cleaning up after a violent disaster. By the way, I definitely agree with your Supreme Court comments.

[Chester]

Hi Sam -- I should have been more clear. I meant employing an Ellis Island type of processing. I didn't mean establishing one location to do this like Ellis Island. If the airports alone had a "solid system" for doing this already, then why would there be an issue over the need for increased vetting or need for the 90-day hiatus? I don't believe the basic airport screening of visas and passports is what Trump is talking about when he asks for better vetting. How does that ensure the refugee doesn't have a communicable disease, for example? The federal government has plenty of resources and facilities near major cities and their airports to handle the subset of people who would need extra screening. And since most refugees, I suspect, take the shortest flight from the middle east, most of them arrive on the east coast, which would also narrow down how many facilities would be required. As far as creating a greater backlash, ANYTHING that Trump does will trigger the snowflakes into fits of hysteria. He can't be worried or intimidated by that. By virtual of the fact these people are described as unhinged, anything sensible would be anathema to them. And as far as the cost, if the extra vetting forestalls terrorist attacks and the deaths of innocent people, I think the marginal financial cost is justified. If the US can spend hundreds of billions on defense, then diverting a small portion of funds into this temporary program is worth the safety it would provide. An ounce of prevention instead of cleaning up after a violent disaster. By the way, I definitely agree with your Supreme Court comments.

I left your quote in tact but my answers imply a parsing out of the quote.

With regards to all matters medical, it is my understanding that this is all done in its entirety by an approved medical team in the country of origin. If it is not done completely and the results are not approved by the US embassy in the country of origin, the visa would not be granted. So all medical concerns are dealt with prior to anyone that has been granted a visa arrives on US soil. See here (https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugeehealth/exams/medical-examination.html)

In addition and from my understanding... the points made specifically by Tammy Bruce address Trump's concerns with regards to our ability to vet folks from each of these seven countries (she covers each one individually as each one's circumstances are unique and independent of each other. The video is 4 minutes and would take less time to watch than my writing it all up here. See here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?95705-Trump-s-Executive-Order-Entry-Suspension--aka-by-MSM-as-the-Muslim-Ban--&p=1132204&viewfull=1#post1132204)

As far as the snowflake comment goes, I sadly must say that from my own personal experience over the last several months, it is all butimpossible to engage in a fact based discussion with these snowflakes without experiencing their triggering and complete dishevelment - meltdown to the max. If I extend this field beyond "snowflakes" to a broader group of folks who seem to simply have found themselves enjoined with the movement of the left, as it has been these last few years, it is my opinion that most of those have created such an emotional attachment to the being they perceive they project, a being that has been joined at the hip with their political identity aspect, that their egos seem to block them from even considering "they got it way, way wrong."

Now look at the official political representative of most of the left... Imagine finding out your own virtuous party cheated! Imagine having to deal with all the leaks that came out. Dozens and dozens of the most embarrassing things were revealed. Each one had enough impact that in a normal election year, one alone might sink their legitimacy to be a viable candidate.

This is why (IMHO) it is so important that folks see how huge a role the media played in trying every trick in the book to sway this election. Any type of government where the key government officials are elected by the populous cannot properly function when their information source produces such a massively distorted picture of both candidates in the way that was done in this last US election.

[boolacalaca]

With regards to all matters medical, it is my understanding that this is all done in its entirety by an approved medical team in the country of origin. If it is not done completely and the results are not approved by the US embassy in the country of origin, the visa would not be granted. So all medical concerns are dealt with prior to anyone that has been granted a visa arrives on US soil. See here (https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugeehealth/exams/medical-examination.html)

This is why (IMHO) it is so important that folks see how huge a role the media played in trying every trick in the book to sway this election. Any type of government where the key government officials are elected by the populous cannot properly function when their information source produces such a massively distorted picture of both candidates in the way that was done in this last US election.

Thanks, Sam for the additional information and comments. The video in particular was a good summary of points as you said.

As far as medical screening, given the CDC's overall track record and the testimony of whistle blowers in that organization, a statement on the CDC's webpage somehow doesn't provide much assurance of anything. If what they claim is true then how could over 1500 refugees be found to have tuberculosis in the United States according to their own report (see link below)? Shouldn't this number be zero if such a program was effective? You say this medical stuff is done in the country of origin. And what if the country of origin is in complete disarray due to war, rampant visa counterfeiting, and terrorist activity? Do we still trust the medical reports and passports we see? You say if this was not done properly in the country of origin, we wouldn't approve an entry visa. And how exactly are we certain of that propriety from such a country? Despite this uncertainty, the entry visas are happening - thus, the need for extra vetting.

https://www.cdc.gov/tb/statistics/reports/2015/pdfs/2015_surveillance_report_fullreport.pdf

Also, why then did the NCBI report Mycobacterium tuberculosis disease in Somali immigrants in Minnesota? There are many other reports such as this on refugees in the US.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11157601

Or this paper from Oxford:
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/39/6/833/358587/Infectious-Disease-Screening-for-Refugees
In part the abstract says: "Refugees resettling in the United States carry a significant burden of infectious diseases as a result of exposures in their countries of origin and the circumstances of their migration. Overseas screening is required before entry, but it incompletely assesses infectious diseases in refugees."

Also, does this medical screening in country of origin look for latent tuberculosis? According to the Tennessee Office for Refugees (TOR), 27% of refugees who arrived in Tennessee between 2011 and 2015 tested positive for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI).

Also, data from the Vermont Department of Health show that more than one-third of refugees resettled in Vermont test positive for tuberculosis.
http://watchdog.org/266740/vermont-refugees-test-positive-for-tuberculosis/

I could keep posting data from various states but you get the point.

We have witnessed the way refugees entered Europe, hundreds and thousands merely walking across the borders - no medical exams there as far as I could see. Given the "open border" mantra of the left, there is no reason to believe the progressives in the United States wouldn't be amendable to the same type of open immigration.

Your comments on the media are right on. I don't see how a democracy can be viable for very long with a media that consistently presents a distorted image of events.

[TargeT]

If what they claim is true then how could over 1500 refugees be found to have tuberculosis in the United States according to their own report (see link below)? Shouldn't this number be zero if such a program was effective?

a simplistic view would think that, yeah.

However, nothing is simple, is it?

Once you are exposed to TB, you test positive for it for the rest of your life (I've never had TB, but I've been exposed to it and test positive for it due to traveling in central america).

LOTS of little "gotcha's" like that in medicine.


I do agree the CDC is crap, but then, i think that about anything run by the government.


And what if the country of origin is in complete disarray due to war, rampant visa counterfeiting, and terrorist activity?

The media may make it seem like countries are "war torn"... but that hasn't happened since ww2 (or maybe Korea.).

Small areas are affected, certainly... but entire countries generally don't; so that's a pretty obscure example.

[boolacalaca]

And what if the country of origin is in complete disarray due to war, rampant visa counterfeiting, and terrorist activity?

The media may make it seem like countries are "war torn"... but that hasn't happened since ww2 (or maybe Korea.).

Small areas are affected, certainly... but entire countries generally don't; so that's a pretty obscure example.

I guess "war torn" has become a qualitative, relative term.
I don't know --- with the following numbers, I'd say the place is war torn -- just the first stat alone: 50% of the country's population have fled their homes.
Take these same percentages and apply them to the US.

In a country with a total population of 22 million, an estimated 11 million Syrians have fled their homes since the outbreak of the civil war in March 2011. Now, in the sixth year of war, 13.5 million are in need of humanitarian assistance within the country. Among those escaping the conflict, the majority have sought refuge in neighbouring countries or within Syria itself. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 4.8 million have fled to Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq, and 6.6 million are internally displaced within Syria. Meanwhile about one million have requested asylum to Europe. Germany, with more than 300,000 cumulated applications, and Sweden with 100,000, are EU’s top receiving countries. http://syrianrefugees.eu/
And these numbers are as of September 2016.

[TargeT]

In a country with a total population of 22 million, an estimated 11 million Syrians have fled their homes since the outbreak of the civil war in March 2011. Now, in the sixth year of war, 13.5 million are in need of humanitarian assistance within the country. Among those escaping the conflict, the majority have sought refuge in neighbouring countries or within Syria itself. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 4.8 million have fled to Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq, and 6.6 million are internally displaced within Syria. Meanwhile about one million have requested asylum to Europe. Germany, with more than 300,000 cumulated applications, and Sweden with 100,000, are EU’s top receiving countries. http://syrianrefugees.eu/
And these numbers are as of September 2016.

Yeah, they didn't "leave their homes", hahaha, they went from 2nd or 3rd world living conditions to 1st world European living conditions (and socialistic programs).

They were basically mass invited for years now by rich investors that have been facilitating the mass migration into europe (aka BRIBED to leave their homes.. and what an easy bribe!). This is part of the plan to destabilize the west... it's already 100% successful in most european countries and is starting to get rather successful in Canada as well..

THAT is what is really happening here.

[boolacalaca]

In a country with a total population of 22 million, an estimated 11 million Syrians have fled their homes since the outbreak of the civil war in March 2011. Now, in the sixth year of war, 13.5 million are in need of humanitarian assistance within the country. Among those escaping the conflict, the majority have sought refuge in neighbouring countries or within Syria itself. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 4.8 million have fled to Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq, and 6.6 million are internally displaced within Syria. Meanwhile about one million have requested asylum to Europe. Germany, with more than 300,000 cumulated applications, and Sweden with 100,000, are EU’s top receiving countries. http://syrianrefugees.eu/
And these numbers are as of September 2016.

Yeah, they didn't "leave their homes", hahaha, they went from 2nd or 3rd world living conditions to 1st world European living conditions (and socialistic programs).

They were basically mass invited for years now by rich investors that have been facilitating the mass migration into europe (aka BRIBED to leave their homes.. and what an easy bribe!). This is part of the plan to destabilize the west... it's already 100% successful in most european countries and is starting to get rather successful in Canada as well..

THAT is what is really happening here.

I'm glad you straightened that out for me. I didn't realize so many bombs and bullets were necessary to bribe people to leave 3rd world living conditions for the socialistic programs in 1st world countries. The global social engineers don't care about people, only their agenda. If moving their plan along entails a bit of population reduction, all the better. To assume it is mutually exclusive for global planners to destabilize the West and tear up the Middle East is a simplistic view.

[Chester]

Yeah, they didn't "leave their homes", hahaha, they went from 2nd or 3rd world living conditions to 1st world European living conditions (and socialistic programs).

They were basically mass invited for years now by rich investors that have been facilitating the mass migration into europe (aka BRIBED to leave their homes.. and what an easy bribe!). This is part of the plan to destabilize the west... it's already 100% successful in most european countries and is starting to get rather successful in Canada as well..

THAT is what is really happening here.

Bingo... at least I can say I fully agree. Thanks Target... also to boolacalaca, thanks also for your posts and I have to tell you, I love the poster name!!! Reminds me of Woodstock.

[TargeT]

I'm glad you straightened that out for me. I didn't realize so many bombs and bullets were necessary to bribe people to leave 3rd world living conditions for the socialistic programs in 1st world countries. The global social engineers don't care about people, only their agenda. If moving their plan along entails a bit of population reduction, all the better.


2011 was the CIA/MI6 trying to cause regime change, Assad wouldn't have it, but we kept pushing and arming the rebels... so we certainly helped on the "push" side of the equation, but the real problem was the offer of "free immigration" through crappy refugee policy.

ZERO of the refugees went to the middle east (culturally and geographically appropriate location), they ALL went to EU.

This was a planned event, with several litigation booby traps pre-set far in advance (back to 1985) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Agreement), or if not that, then poorly written laws heavily leveraged (but I think collusion). Whole countries are being bribed by the EU (http://www.ekathimerini.com/215298/article/ekathimerini/news/greece-strives-to-absorb-eus-migration-funds) to allow it.

And of course, we have the Soros hack (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-16/soros-hack-reveals-plot-behind-europes-refugee-crisis-media-funding-and-manipulation), which explains everything I've said in far greater detail (media manipulation, migration funding etc..).

Why wouldn't you go to the EU if you had a "get in free" pass that bypasses years of paper work?

[avid]

Bingo... at least I can say I fully agree. Thanks Target... also to boolacalaca, thanks also for your posts and I have to tell you, I love the poster name!!! Reminds me of Woodstock.
Yes, happy memories of Woodstock Sam....
_dIvQqsjQIg
Sorry, off topic.... :focus:

[boolacalaca]

To reiterate -- to assume it is mutually exclusive for global planners to destabilize the West and also tear up the Middle East into a war torn hell hole is a simplistic view. I never said there wasn't a plan to mess up the West. But to conclude Syria can't be war torn too....well, a simplistic view would think that, yeah.

As the old song (from Woodstock) goes -- "There's plenty of good money to be made supplying the army with the tools of the trade..."

Yeah, Sam, glad you caught the Woodstock reference.
"...I wanna take you higher!"

[bettye198]

I would love to reply with a lot of the quotes I have read here, but suffice to say, it would take up a lot of space!:))
I will align myself with those who feel the ban is justified. I come from a place where I lived in Europe and I lived in Mexico and the paperwork and vetting was a lot and accepted. Still, there was some protesting when my husband was only one of 14 who was accepted into Med School in Europe, and when we moved out of the "cold" climate where I could not secure a job without having 3 languages under my belt, we resided a long time in Mexico. That was the main experience of my life. Federales at the border were insulting, antagonizing, horrible. With the years down there, still, at the last year, I was detained at Nogales trying to cross the border. You have to have cash in your pocket if you drive down there because police will stop you for any reason ( no speed signs) and anticipate a bribe to get out of a no nonsense ticket. I lived in a predominately American neighborhood in a main Metropolis there and still daily helicopters overhead with assault weapons pointing downward. The Federales would sit in backseats of taxicabs and plant pot where ever they could where Americans lived in order to "arrest", then of course accept more bribes. The tuition was off the charts.
When I taught nursing students in Labor and Delivery in California at a Catholic hospital, it became a sanctuary hospital for pregnant women still dirty from the field without prenatal care and with language barriers to come in in full blown labor. I can tell you the health picture was a hot mess. Yet, the Sisters of that Catholic order always brought them in. No papers just drove up from the border.
I have felt insecure for a long time. Anyone who has not, good for you, but our country has been under siege for a while. It may not be that ominous, but it is lurking in the shadows. I want to live side by side with my world neighbors and I have done so for many years, but the questionable ones, the unmarried males ( as what was mentioned) pose a threat. They are bored, perhaps uneducated and in poverty and they will rile up to do what they can paid or not paid, hypnotically controlled or not to cause turmoil and terror. Does that make me a hateful discompassionate person? No it does not. I still lock my home, my car, my offices for security. And btw, one of my offices is right next door to a Mosque in LA. A poor rendition of one though, because it is obvious the members just do not have the funds. I have watched for 8 yrs, Muslim families in their garb attend services, gatherings. What do I think about that? They are calm, non violent, happy to be among their own. Once, they offered food to us. They were simply practicing their faith. I would never categorize them with Islamic terrorists who have conjured up a way to promote the dark side of their prophecy or their sharia law.

[TargeT]

tear up the Middle East into a war torn hell hole



I've been to the middle east, we didn't change it a whole lot really based on my visits and education on the area. We did give them much more effective tools, that's certainly "our bad".
But, there's not been a lot of "peace" in the middle east, Syria is no exception.
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/atlas_middle_east/syria_timeline.jpg


I understand your empathetic outreach, I just think it's misinformed a bit.


It's not even just "one" war in syria (they are so used to war, that wouldn't be enough) it's like 3, 3 wars going on at the same time. (http://www.callofhopeus.org/blog/timelinesyria)

Once all the facts come out and everything is declassified it will be a fascinating case study, for now it's just the raw/gritty/mortal grinding of the elites machinations.

[boolacalaca]

tear up the Middle East into a war torn hell hole

I've been to the middle east, we didn't change it a whole lot really based on my visits and education on the area. We did give them much more effective tools, that's certainly "our bad".
But, there's not been a lot of "peace" in the middle east, Syria is no exception.
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/atlas_middle_east/syria_timeline.jpg

I understand your empathetic outreach, I just think it's misinformed a bit.

It's not even just "one" war in syria (they are so used to war, that wouldn't be enough) it's like 3, 3 wars going on at the same time. (http://www.callofhopeus.org/blog/timelinesyria)

Once all the facts come out and everything is declassified it will be a fascinating case study, for now it's just the raw/gritty/mortal grinding of the elites machinations.

It's curious that you should interpret me simply noting that an area of the world is "worn torn" as me having an "empathetic outreach." I really don't see how that follows unless there is some kind of ideological litmus test involved. According to that logic, I guess if I merely noted that an area of a city is a "ghetto" I would also be having an "empathetic outreach." Have words like "war torn" or "ghetto" become emotionally charged and signal more than their definition implies? In fact, I do not intend more than the word's definition and only mentioned it because it's one of Trump's conditions for increased vetting.

Originally, all I said was that Trump might counter the ban on his EO by establishing some kind of Ellis Island type of processing for those refugees he has defined as needing more vetting before being allowed into the country. His definition was clear in the EO, specifying "war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest" as indicators:

"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. Deteriorating conditions in certain countries due to war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest increase the likelihood that terrorists will use any means possible to enter the United States. The United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism."

Granted, it can be argued whether or not conditions in the Middle East qualify as "deteriorating" compared to the history of the Middle East in general. Many can claim the whole place has been unstable and deteriorating for centuries, so what's new about that? The only difference now may be that global planners have included this deterioration into designs on destabilizing the West.

You got me - I haven't been to the Middle East -- but I have been to YouTube (which, according to your assessment of the Middle East, is probably better).
As you say, "there's not been a lot of "peace" in the middle east"...and "they are so used to war." I get it - no empathetic outreach needed here.
Since I like visuals over black and white charts, I thought seeing a 1000 years of war compressed into 5 minutes would tell the tale - I could dramatically see just how unstable and deteriorating the Middle East has been through time. Although strangely, it seems primarily Europe turns out to be the place where "there's not been a lot of peace" and "they are so used to war."

1hsDn2kNriI

After seeing this video, I can now see why, between 1880 and 1930, over 27 million people entered the United States from Europe - about 12 million through Ellis Island.
I hope I'm not being too empathetic to Europe in pointing that out.

[TargeT]

It's curious that you should interpret me simply noting that an area of the world is "worn torn" as me having an "empathetic outreach." I really don't see how that follows unless there is some kind of ideological litmus test involved. According to that logic, I guess if I merely noted that an area of a city is a "ghetto" I would also be having an "empathetic outreach." Have words like "war torn" or "ghetto" become emotionally charged and signal more than their definition implies? In fact, I do not intend more than the word's definition and only mentioned it because it's one of Trump's conditions for increased vetting.

You mentioned bribery by bombs and bullets (beautiful alliteration BTW), it's a pretty rough place; I feel bad for the people living there, thought u would too. ;)


The only difference now may be that global planners have included this deterioration into designs on destabilizing the West.

I see it like a slow pot that was simmering; waiting for the right time to be brought to a boil and spilled "west".

Toss a little "Arab spring" in a few "toppled dictators" (aka CIA lead regime change) and arm every faction in sight... easy peazy




I hope I'm not being too empathetic to Europe in pointing that out.

See, I would have focused on the word "misinformed" not "empathetic"; but hey.. to each their own ;)

I thought things quieted down in Europe proper after WW2.. I'm pretty weak on 1948-1990 European history.

[Bill Ryan]

.
This short personal statement (three and a half minutes) was posted by Steven Gern, a former US Marine on the ground in Iraq, and now working in security there.

It offers some thoughts for those to consider who may be opposed to Trump's stance on US immigration. He speaks from his first-hand experience.

There are various re-uploaded versions of this on the net (it went quite viral quite quickly), but this one has captions, so may be useful.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTXN2p3qVRg

[Hervé]

Of course, one wonders what the answer would have been pre-Iraqui war and Saddam's demise ^^^

[TargeT]

Of course, one wonders what the answer would have been pre-Iraqui war and Saddam's demise ^^^

You mean Kuwait invasion? (early 90's), or Iraq/Iran contra time frame?

Same answer.

[Bill Ryan]

.
This short personal statement (three and a half minutes) was posted by Steven Gern, a former US Marine on the ground in Iraq, and now working in security there.

It offers some thoughts for those to consider who may be opposed to Trump's stance on US immigration. He speaks from his first-hand experience.

There are various re-uploaded versions of this on the net (it went quite viral quite quickly), but this one has captions, so may be useful.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTXN2p3qVRg


Steve Gern has now been evacuated from Iraq. From http://defiantamerica.com/outspoken-former-marine-steven-gern-evacuated-iraq:

~~

An outspoken former U.S. Marine working as a security specialist in Iraq had to be evacuated after posting a video on Facebook, giving his response (http://defiantamerica.com/marine-working-iraq-responds-trumps-travel-ban/) to President Donald Trump’s executive order banning travel to the US from certain Muslim countries.

Seen more than 42 million times, Steven Gern explained in the video how an American would be treated in the countries that Trump included in his temporary travel ban.

YouTube has since removed his video with a message that it was removed for “hate speech.” How ridiculous is that? The video can still be seen on his Facebook profile here (https://www.facebook.com/steven.gern/posts/10154152514275404).

“Apparently, it wasn’t safe for me to remain in the location I was in,” he said in a follow up video. “So, I’m being sent out.”

[Chester]

YouTube has since removed his [Gern's] video with a message that it was removed for “hate speech.” How ridiculous is that? The video can still be seen on his Facebook profile here (https://www.facebook.com/steven.gern/posts/10154152514275404).


“Apparently, it wasn’t safe for me to remain in the location I was in,” he said in a follow up video. “So, I’m being sent out.”

I agree his video should be removed. When someone's words can be perceived as hateful (despite that their words have violated no statute within the applicable jurisdiction), then it makes sense to remove them.

In addition, when "hateful actions" occur, as long as it is against guys like Gern (an American) and any other American or perhaps Canadian or perhaps a Brit or perhaps anyone not sharing 'something' that endears them to the local community or someone that is not already accepted by the local community... these actions, no matter how barbaric - should and must be protected!!!

Where's that sarcasm emoticon?... Found it!

:sarcastic:

I think that all truth should be screened so that only selective truth should ever be allowed to be vocalized or otherwise communicated.

and along bigger lines... this "free speech stuff" has got to end.

[OnyxKnight]

Agree about Gordon(although I don't think him some kind of disinfo agent, or shill). His word isn't gospel, but I agree with him on Trump.

By the way:Trump put Steve Bannon on the NSC, and essentially removed the joint chiefs/DNI from same. That is not good. I think impeaching Trump, or invoking the 25th amendment to remove him, is necessary, even urgent. YMMV.

Considering he is the best choice you've had in awhile, I'll refrain from defending his actions, I'll just ask you - who should take his place? Do you have somebody in mind that is interested and can actually do it?



The blatantly hypocritical aspect of all this is that refugees from Saudi Arabia are not included. WTF?? Now THAT is pure hypocrisy there Donald. The one Muslim country in the middle east that loves to export violence more than any other and they are free to enter? That is the first country that would be on my list.

It will take some mighty fine predictive policing to determine who has a propensity for violence. Israel can help us out there. They are good at that. In the mean time it is best to err on the side of caution.

He plans to extend the roster with more countries of his own picks. All the countries so far were Obama's choice. You can question his decision and call him a hypocrite if his inclusions later on don't have Saudi Arabia. So far the only person you can criticize about this is Obama.



if Trump is legitimate we can only hope he will drain the swamp (although he seems to be a slave of Israel so far)-

If he was that enamored with Israel he wouldn't have said what he said about the Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories.



Many of the people affected are Christians fleeing persecution. Woman and children. I am not certain that America would be a good place for the refugees considering the current political and social climate. Also I feel that it makes more sense for them to settle closer to their homeland, if possible, for ease of acclimation and return to homeland should things change enough to allow for the safe repatriation...

How many Christians did Obama save from these countries? Seems like the preference was for Muslims only. Meanwhile during the migration crisis many Christians died at sea, because "moderate" muslims threw them in the Sea, together with their wives and kids. But the only corpse the media allowed to us to feel bad about was a muslim boy washed ashore in Greece. The initial reporting on the Christians fed on the sharks went away and got swept under the rug (even then, it was obscure sources who covered this, none of the MSM did so).

The rest I agree. It's a question that offered no answer from the likes of UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Iran or Jordan. We should keep asking, just so that people are aware that there were better migration choices nearby than Europe or any other, suspiciously western/pro-western country.

[Chester]

The rest I agree. It's a question that offered no answer from the likes of UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Iran or Jordan. We should keep asking, just so that people are aware that there were better migration choices nearby than Europe or any other, suspiciously western/pro-western country.

Hi, thanks for the post OnyxKnight

I posted this short (4 minute) video a few pages back.

sL9bzwQoqOE

Tammy Bruce explains for each of the seven countries exactly why each one (and by implication not others) were listed in this EO.

As for any of the countries not listed in the EO that folks have been asking about, some of these have also been specifically addressed by spokesmen for the Trump administration. What they have said was that when a country is known to have (or perceived to have) reasonable standards of documentation for their citizens and where there is not known "criminal documentation falsification networks" then the State Department considers the documentation legitimate and thus has a raised confidence that vetting can be done to an acceptable level commiserate with the threat from the specific region.

Trump had to start somewhere and it makes sense he starts with these seven countries. If I am an intermediate and long range thinker, I send signals to other countries who may be added to these lists... "clean up your own documentation and fraud and perhaps your country won't be added to the list."

I don't think even Trump himself, in private, would not agree the roll out as well as the order itself could have been done better. I certainly believe this. But I also believe these mistakes will be handled and soon... both by issuing new, better written, more properly defined EOs and how matters are resolved in court.

[Rocky_Shorz]

Trump just made recreational marijuana illegal in Colorado and Washington!!!

Hide your **** man...

[TargeT]

Trump just made recreational marijuana illegal in Colorado and Washington!!!

Hide your **** man...

its been federally illegal for a few decades now... sounds like he's just doing more of what he's already doing: enforcing laws.

[Chester]

Trump just made recreational marijuana illegal in Colorado and Washington!!!

Hide your **** man...

Apologies, Rocky... but your post is false and also, even if it were true, would have absolutely zero to do this first Immigration Suspension EO which is what this post is about... How about start a different thread about this? I would be happy to participate.

[Rocky_Shorz]

Well immigration ban is nothing compared to criminalizing pot so lawyers have someone to defend.

Don't have to pay food stamps if they're a damn hippy for 10 years, next it will be announced for health care.

Not having to feed the poor or give them health care will save a buttload for his scumbag 1% buddies...

The timing planned for a May 1st revolution is falling into place...

No 9/11 justice...