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

Iranian PHD student banned from US despite having a house, job, dog and car Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Appalling. How can you possibly defend Trump's ridiculous executive order when innocent people are being barred.

    http://thetab.com/us/clemson/2017/01...campaign=xpost
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    This is the one major thing so far that I have not agreed with Trump.

    It's bloody awful, what is their line of thinking when they ban a US citizen, with no links to terrorism whatsoever apart from his nationality? Do they think they get radicalized when they go out of the US, so can't risk them coming back in?

    It's stupid.
    • Offline

      20
      Appalling. How can you possibly defend taking in refugees when innocent people are being killed.

      http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu...-idUSKCN1040SF

      Its all the same silly appeal to individual cases and ignoring the bigger picture.
      Offline

      20
      ReputationRep:
      It's impossible to just ban the bad guys because you never know who's going to be the next terrorism. It had to be a blanket ban
      Offline

      14
      ReputationRep:
      Fortunately the ban will lift within 90 days.

      I hope there wont be any problems when I spend summer in Seattle
      • Section Leader
      • Clearing and Applications Advisor
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Stoke123)
      Fortunately the ban will lift within 90 days.

      I hope there wont be any problems when I spend summer in Seattle
      If the EO is allowed* to stand it is also likely to be renewed after 90 days.

      *Which is currently being challenged and aspects have already been "withdrawn" such as Green Card holders now facing less stringent exclusions.

      Posted from TSR Mobile
      Offline

      12
      ReputationRep:
      I doubt the people who stoned transgender women, attacked gay people, and sexually assaulted women and children were involved in terrorism, they were just living their culture. As they had no terrorist links, they would probably be allowed in. A blanket ban is better
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Stoke123)
      Fortunately the ban will lift within 90 days.
      No, this is just the beginning of Trump's plan. He's aiming for a total and permanent ban of all Muslims. Obviously he had to start small with this.

      ...And I agree. There's too many of them - let them stay in their own part of the world.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      Well of course a few innocents will be caught in the crossfire, but there simply isn't enough time to deal with everyone individually. It's much more efficient just to ban everyone that fits the profile, with no exceptions.
      • Political Ambassador
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      Noooooooo, not the dog!!!
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Google22)
      This is the one major thing so far that I have not agreed with Trump.

      It's bloody awful, what is their line of thinking when they ban a US citizen, with no links to terrorism whatsoever apart from his nationality? Do they think they get radicalized when they go out of the US, so can't risk them coming back in?

      It's stupid.
      Correct me if I'm wrong, but she wasn't a citizen, was she?
      Offline

      11
      ReputationRep:
      It is troubling how almost every single case of denials of entry and potential deportations in America which have been presented to me over the past few days in the news have centred around academics at universities, almost as if to justify to us that not all immigrants in the US are inextrodinary, uneducated lowlives. How about those 'normal' people who are being turned back at airports, do they not matter to those who are targeted by such reports, because they're not an academic or are related to one, and therefore fit in with the invented standards of social acceptability so many obviously have?
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by jambojim97)
      Appalling. How can you possibly defend Trump's ridiculous executive order when innocent people are being barred.

      http://thetab.com/us/clemson/2017/01...campaign=xpost
      Wait, she had a dog?

      Trump is the Devil incarnate!

      FFS.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Joel 96)
      Correct me if I'm wrong, but she wasn't a citizen, was she?
      No, but do you not think the US should at least appreciate the human rights of non-citizen residents who have a life in The States?
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by jambojim97)
      No, but do you not think the US should at least appreciate the human rights of non-citizen residents who have a life in The States?
      Not particularly. She's 29 years old; she had 7 years to apply for citizenship. If she really valued the aspects of going in and out of a country and, ultimately, wanted to live there, then she should have applied.

      Obviously, non-citizens have rights, but we're talking about countries with links to terrorism and radicalism. You can argue that it's unfair, but it's precaution. You can't treat people as individuals on this.
      • Section Leader
      • Clearing and Applications Advisor
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Joel 96)
      Not particularly. She's 29 years old; she had 7 years to apply for citizenship. If she really valued the aspects of going in and out of a country and, ultimately, wanted to live there, then she should have applied.

      Obviously, non-citizens have rights, but we're talking about countries with links to terrorism and radicalism. You can argue that it's unfair, but it's precaution. You can't treat people as individuals on this.
      "First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out —
      Because I was not a socialist.

      Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out —
      Because I was not a trade unionist.

      Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
      Because I was not a Jew.

      Then they came for me —
      and there was no one left to speak for me."

      Martin Niemöller
      Offline

      11
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Stoke123)
      Fortunately the ban will lift within 90 days.

      I hope there wont be any problems when I spend summer in Seattle
      Why would there be? Are you a citizen of any of the affected countries?
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by jneill)
      "First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out —
      Because I was not a socialist.

      Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out —
      Because I was not a trade unionist.

      Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
      Because I was not a Jew.

      Then they came for me —
      and there was no one left to speak for me."

      Martin Niemöller
      Is that an argument?
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      ideally we will get towards banning all muslims

      Posted from TSR Mobile
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Joel 96)
      Not particularly. She's 29 years old; she had 7 years to apply for citizenship. If she really valued the aspects of going in and out of a country and, ultimately, wanted to live there, then she should have applied.

      Obviously, non-citizens have rights, but we're talking about countries with links to terrorism and radicalism. You can argue that it's unfair, but it's precaution. You can't treat people as individuals on this.
      No, that's incorrect. During her studies, she was on a student visa - a nonimmigrant visa for the purpose of study. Since completing her doctorate, she has been in the US on a temporary worker visa. Both of these are nonimmigrant visas meaning she has no avenue to apply for citizenship.

      Therefore my point still stands that she has been treated unfairly and inhumanely.
     
     
     
  1. 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.

  2. Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  3. 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.

  4. 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.