Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Palmyra)
    Yesterday, Trump affirmed a ban on entry of individuals from 7 "detrimental" countries: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen and Libya. This ban seems incredibly disproportionate and misguided.

    Firstly, this doesn't really seem to be a "Muslim ban" - it doesn't include the country with the largest population of Muslims (India), nor the largest Muslim-majority country (Indonesia), nor Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan or Pakistan.

    Secondly, there have been very few terrorist attacks in the U.S. by Muslim immigrants. Even fewer from the countries actually affected by this ban. When we look at the nationalities of the 9/11 hijackers we see that 15/19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia, none of the 9/11 hijackers were from the 7 countries subject to this ban. There are more Americans in ISIS than Iranians in ISIS.

    Thirdly, the threat of terrorism is clearly most likely to arise in the domestic context - that is to say, home grown terrorists. This ban does nothing to address this issue, other than further marginalise American Muslims and provide further fuel to ISIS/radical elements. Curiously, if we want to address the problem of home grown terrorism, dealing with Saudi Arabia's funding of Wahabbism across the globe might be a good place to start. Many intelligence agencies have recognised the problem of Saudi-funded radicalisation across the West, with both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump acknowledging this problem (quote below) - yet, for some reason, what Trump called "the world's biggest funders of terrorism" (Saudi Arabia) did not manage to make it onto his "Muslim Ban", ostensibly designed to protect Americans from terrorism.



    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/26/w...slam.html?_r=0
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-you...b_6501916.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a6763366.html

    Lastly, I think it is worth noting the pure insanity of the ban. This ban applies to green card holders who are legal residents of the U.S., that, upon returning from leaving the country (for holidays, etc), may find that they cannot reenter their home country.
    I don't get why the countries with the most hardline populations - Egypt, Saudi and Pakistan aren't included?
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Actually, that would be "number of people killed by people using guns".

    How many of them were suicides,accidental?

    Do you have the stats for US citizens murdered by foreigners/immigrants (legal or otherwise) for the same time period?

    Wouldn't want people thinking you cherry picked the stats to support your point would we?
    The number of people killed in homicides using guns is about 10-13,000 a year.

    I dont believe or I havent seen figures that make the distinction on whether they are foreigners or not.
    They do record the number of people who die as a result of terrorism.

    Name:  us terrorism.PNG
Views: 66
Size:  54.2 KB

    The number for 2012,13 and 14 were 6,5 and 17 respecively.

    I think his point was you have much more chance of being shot and killed than dying due to terrorism. No need to cherry pick to give an idea of risk. There are also about 33,000 road traffic fatalities per year.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dat Tall Guy)
    I don't get why the countries with the most hardline populations - Egypt, Saudi and Pakistan aren't included?
    Please see post 4.

    If Trump wants to "ban Muslims" or "prevent terrorism", why aren't Saudi Arabia, Turkey or the UAE included in his list of "detrimental" nations, you might ask.

    Coincidentally, Trump has substantial business interests in all these countries, but no business interests in the 7 included in the ban.

    In Saudi Arabia, for instance, Trump "lists companies on his FEC filing possibly related to a development project in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia’s second-biggest city, located outside Mecca: DT Jeddah Technical Services Manager LLC, DT Jeddah Technical Services Manager Member Corp., THC Jeddah Hotel Manager LLC and THC Jeddah Hotel Manager Member Corp".

    In the UAE, "The Trump Organization has a licensing and management deal" in Dubai with Damac Properties Dubai Co. for a golf course and luxury villas currently under construction. Another Trump-branded golf course, designed by Tiger Woods, is under development with Damac nearby".


    Yet Trump himself has referred to Saudi Arabia as "the world’s biggest funders of terrorism", so why hasn't he included them in his "Muslim ban"? Clearly he has decided that his own interests lie above those of the American people. So much for being a "man of the people".
    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2..._medium=social
    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/t...-of-conflicts/
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by Dat Tall Guy)
    I don't get why the countries with the most hardline populations - Egypt, Saudi and Pakistan aren't included?
    Because they are US allies and they can also raise a fuss.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    They do record the number of people who die as a result of terrorism.

    The number for 2012,13 and 14 were 6,5 and 17 respectively.
    How many of these were refugees (or immigrants) from the 7 countries listed in the ban?

    Conversely, how many were home grown terrorists? Clearly the vast majority will be in the latter, further emphasising my comments earlier:

    if terrorism is the aim then (i) he chose the wrong countries (15/19 of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens - and Saudi, curiously, are not included in the ban), and (ii) the focus should be on home grown terrorism (enacting anti-Muslim legislation and not checking Saudi-funded Wahabbism will not serve this end).
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dindu)
    Sorry not aware with US system; is green card not citizenship? Or I'm assuming it's equivalent to Leave to Remain in the UK.

    That sucks for the student, will waste a whole year of studies at the minimum. If he just put a restriction on refugees I actually wouldn't have much of a problem with it, restricting students and people with long standing jobs already is just dumb.
    "My wife is a permanent resident w a green card". See point 3:



    https://twitter.com/RealLucasNeff/st...41408396275712
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Palmyra)
    "My wife is a permanent resident w a green card". See point 3:



    https://twitter.com/RealLucasNeff/st...41408396275712
    Ah right, I though green card = citizen and was confused as barring citizens entry is illegal.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    The number of people killed in homicides using guns is about 10-13,000 a year.

    I dont believe or I havent seen figures that make the distinction on whether they are foreigners or not.
    They do record the number of people who die as a result of terrorism.

    Name:  us terrorism.PNG
Views: 66
Size:  54.2 KB

    The number for 2012,13 and 14 were 6,5 and 17 respecively.

    I think his point was you have much more chance of being shot and killed than dying due to terrorism. No need to cherry pick to give an idea of risk. There are also about 33,000 road traffic fatalities per year.
    Thank you for clearing that up.

    The fact that US citizens kill other US citizens is immaterial to the debate.

    The US government has a duty to protect US citizens, it has no duty to allow non US citizens into the US.

    If I were a US citizen i would view Trumps travel ban as a good start, but be disappointed on how limited it was.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:

    It is easy to forget or ignore how ordinary people will be/are being affected by this.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Thank you for clearing that up.

    The fact that US citizens kill other US citizens is immaterial to the debate.

    The US government has a duty to protect US citizens, it has no duty to allow non US citizens into the US.

    If I were a US citizen i would view Trumps travel ban as a good start, but be disappointed on how limited it was.
    Its not irrelevant when looking at the actual risk , that is the point. On that basis you might as well ban any non americans (including tourists and business people) from entering the US.

    The US has a duty to look out for the best interests of its citizens. that would mean making the best decisions and aboding those which are disproportionate or innefective.

    Would you wanting him to be banning all muslims including those from the UK?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jape)
    Also, and I might be misremembering, but I'm pretty sure this isn't a blanket Muslim ban. It's a temporary ban on immigrants from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen (persecuted religious minorities can come through though).
    Wrong (again...). There is no mention of religion:

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Its not irrelevant when looking at the actual risk , that is the point. On that basis you might as well ban any non americans (including tourists and business people) from entering the US.

    The US has a duty to look out for the best interests of its citizens. that would mean making the best decisions and aboding those which are disproportionate or innefective.

    Would you wanting him to be banning all muslims including those from the UK?
    Some Muslims pose a risk to the West, until a foolproof way of deciding which ones, why take the risk?

    Muslim immigration is not vital to the wellbeing of the Western world.

    Its not Trumps decision to ban Muslim immigration into Britain.

    To answer your question, yes i would like to see an end to Muslim immigration into the UK.

    Islam is incompatible with Western democracy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Some Muslims pose a risk to the West, until a foolproof way of deciding which ones, why take the risk?

    Muslim immigration is not vital to the wellbeing of the Western world.

    Its not Trumps decision to ban Muslim immigration into Britain.

    To answer your question, yes i would like to see an end to Muslim immigration into the UK.

    Islam is incompatible with Western democracy.
    How do you know who is Muslim?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Some Muslims pose a risk to the West, until a foolproof way of deciding which ones, why take the risk?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    These measures are purely irrational. And what the hell? Doesn't anyone analyze these orders or can the president simply use his extremely broad powers to determine the freedom of people who have lived in that country for decades?? They have already legally immigrated, they are legal residents.

    So if someone of Iranian citizenship who holds a green card went to London to visit their ill mother, they are banned from the US for 30 days or more????? Why? Based on what reasons?

    This is tragic.

    Name:  image.jpeg
Views: 55
Size:  61.4 KB
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dindu)
    How do you know who is Muslim?
    Chances are if they come from a Muslim country, they're Muslim.

    Afghanistan for instance, for some reason there are not a lot of Jews left there.

    Who knows why?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Chances are if they come from a Muslim country, they're Muslim.

    Afghanistan for instance, for some reason there are not a lot of Jews left there.

    Who knows why?
    What is a Muslim country?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    America has elected somebody who pretty much isn't transparent from the get go. And isn't that what we expect from all leaders?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EC)
    So if someone of Iranian citizenship who holds a green card went to London to visit his ill mother, he is banned from the US for 30 days or more????? Why? Based on what reasons?
    PRSOM. It's for 90 days, by the way (not 30). The most worrying thing is that Trump could simply renew this executive order every 90 days...

    There are lots of pretty sad stories to come from this already.

    Name:  IMG_4159.PNG
Views: 51
Size:  464.8 KB

    (Original post by joe cooley)
    Chances are if they come from a Muslim country, they're Muslim.

    Afghanistan for instance, for some reason there are not a lot of Jews left there.
    Afghanistan isn't included in the ban.

    Iran, which is in the ban, has the largest population of Jews in the Middle East outside of Israel (estimated 10,000-40,000 - and a Jewish MP), and around 400,000 Christians (and Churches from thousands of years ago). Additionally, just like many people in the UK will identify as Christian in the census for cultural reasons, the same applies for Islam in Iran (but also societal pressures - i.e. there is no option for "atheist" in the census).

    No refugee from any of the 7 countries in the ban has ever killed anybody in the USA.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dindu)
    What is a Muslim country?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam

    Follow the link, that'll give you a clue.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 31, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.