Liberals seem to be incapable of comprehending what the "Muslim Ban" is about

6 out of 7 countries on the ban list are active war zones. Which means they have unstable governments, poor infrastructure, and consequently poor documentation of their citizens, undermining any vetting process that might be employed during their immigration to the US.

That's what this ban is about. Temporarily limiting immigration from countries where it is difficult to assess citizens prior to granting them legal entry to the US, until measures have been implemented to do this.

It has nothing to do with "Muslims". Out of the 10 countries with the highest Muslim populations in the world, only one is on this list.

Zero Americans have been killed by Iraqi citizens? Have you not heard of something called the Iraq war?

Strange lot the left.

Trump suggests waterboarding may be effective but will take the advice of the military and intelligence community, total pant wetting SJW tantrum mode.

Obama has weekly meetings to update his death list, kills hundreds with drone strikes, plenty of "collateral" damage,AKA women and children the left.......Meh, no biggie!

Rank hypocrisy of the highest order.

I see.

My only concern with this plan is that it doesn't tackle the bigger problem of home grown terrorism or Saudi funded radicalisation.

I am no particular fan of Mo Farah. He is almost certainly a drug cheat, and the way he has been used as a poster child for multiculturalism (and of course is still being used for political purposes in this issue) will come back to bite those who have done it, if and when his drug abuse is ever proven.

But although he is definitely to blame for gaining medals and fame through unfair and illegal means, he is not to blame for the way he has been politicised. Nor is he any kind of terrorist threat.

But that doesn't mean that UK Muslims entering the US do not constitute a much higher statistical risk of being a terrorist than non Muslims. And that almost all UK Muslims are from the diaspora of Muslim countries.

So whilst this process is crude and perhaps an ineffective measure. A sledgehammer to crack a nut. You can see the rationale behind it.

We are not prepared to accept the fact that UK Muslims constitute a terror threat. We don't want to tar the vast majority of innocent people with the guilt of their coreligionists. We prefer to be in denial about it. It is a taboo subject.

But Trump and his movement have no such taboo.

Saudi funded radicalisation? Explain.

The list counts the number of Americans killed on American soil by people coming from those countries (which, as you will recall, is the point of the ban).

Not a single American has been killed by an Iraqi in a terror attack on American soil. On the other hand, thousands of Americans were killed by Saudis and yet Saudi Arabia is not included in the ban.

Bannon has basically admitted that they don't even think it has much point in policy terms, it was a political move to impress their credulous supporters. But they thought it would confuse and break the left-wing whereas in fact the progressive movement blasted the administration with both barrels. It has been a huge galvaniser for the left-wing opposition to Trump, which is going to make the Tea Party look like bipartisanship.

Poor snowflake, you seem to be traumatised by the fact the left-wing thinks you're stupid, low rent, superficial and credulous (which you are). Deep down you crave respectability. You should know you'll never get it; we think you're trash. And we're going to win this; Trump is already historically unpopular, only a week into his presidency.

This is just the start; the American progressive movement is going to make him the first successfully impeached president

Saudi Arabia (indirectly) funds the spread of Wahhabism in western countries. In the form of journals, leaflets, DVDs etc mostly in English to probably appeal to younger generations that might not speak Arabic.

For a more detailed explanation click here

Basically you came up with one leftwing ******* who wanted to kill Trump compared to one Muslim ******* who wanted to kill hundreds on a passenger plane.

Well done.

No, I also pointed out the 2 hackers.

Sorry Joe, but those few hundred lives probably wouldn't make as much difference to US national security as a well placed high level single kill or releasing information from sensitive servers...

Tell that to the parents of one of the 49 killed in the Pulse nightclub by one of your Islamic chums.

Tell that to the parents of one of the 49 killed in the Pulse nightclub by one of your Islamic chums.

Omar Mateen was an American born, American citizen. He would not have been affected by the "Muslim Ban".

No, but it would have affected his parents.

If they had not immigrated to the US, Mateen would not have been born there.

Its not only first generation Muslim immigrants that turn to terror,Mohammad Sidique Khan born and bred here, still made the decision that the kuffar deserve death.

So, how far back do you go?
Timothy McVeigh was several generations American, yet he killed 150 odd in a terrorist attack.
Should the US ban all people of Irish stock? If not, they are willingly allowing another Oklahoma. Is that what you want?

And then there's 9/11. Those attacks by Saudi nationals resulted in 3000 odd deaths, yet Saudis are not covered by the ban.

Something don't add up!

AlexanderHam

What so you actually believe the unpopularity polls, the same so called expert polls that said brexit and trump would never happen

Tell that to the parents of one of the 49 killed in the Pulse nightclub by one of your Islamic chums.