Turn on thread page Beta

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

Announcements
    • 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

    13
    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
    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
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (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    *Which is currently being challenged and aspects have already been "withdrawn" such as Green Card holders now facing less stringent exclusions.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

    16
    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
    Online

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

    16
    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

    14
    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

    16
    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
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (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

    12
    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

    16
    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.
    Offline

    18
    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
    Plenty of people will have lost their jobs in 90 days.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

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

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