January 29, 2017 3:19 am at 3:19 am #619111mw13Participant
COKIE ROBERTS, ABC NEWS: I mean, shutting out — there are 8 million children in the world right now who are refugees. Eight million. And if you shut out Syrian refugees at this moment, it’s like shutting the Jews out during World War II.January 29, 2017 4:51 am at 4:51 am #1213216
Wondering… For those who voted for Trump, what are your thoughts about his immigration ban thus far?January 29, 2017 5:21 am at 5:21 am #1213217
The problem is there are terrorists embedded in the Syrian and other refuge groups. Accepting them into America risks bringing terrorists to the American homeland, as Germany and Europe painfully learned after accepting a million Syrian, Afghanistan and other refugees who came as part of the mass flow of refugees and brought their terror to the continent.
America needs to put the safety of America first.January 29, 2017 5:57 am at 5:57 am #1213218Avi KParticipant
Lightbrite, what would have been the thoughts of those who voted for Clinton when she carried out the “Civil Rights” Commission’s recommendation to set religious doctrine and tell religious groups whom they can appoint as clergy?January 29, 2017 1:42 pm at 1:42 pm #1213219zahavasdadParticipant
There are many jews from Syria, Iran, Iraq and the ban does not distingush between a muslims, christian or a jew
Also it seems Saudi Arabia was not on the list and most of the deaths from terrorism occured from people from Saudi ArabiaJanuary 29, 2017 1:49 pm at 1:49 pm #1213220
I never heard of the civil rights commission’so recommendation.
Did she say that she agreed with it and would she have followed through?
Isn’t it possible that commissions have any number of recommendations that get scraped at some point anyway?January 29, 2017 1:51 pm at 1:51 pm #1213221
Sounds like it’s more than terrorism. Maybe he is allying with Putin here and banning places for covert leverages.January 29, 2017 2:04 pm at 2:04 pm #1213222
mw13: One of the primary differences between this and WWII was that there was no concern at all that Jews were terrorists and were interested in destroying America, as opposed to people in many of these countries that were blocked who want just that.
It’s true that this ban is not comprehensive, and will not stop determined terrorists and may provoke additional action and hate from Islamic groups. Personally, I think this should have been a much wider ban, and more specific towards Radical Islam in nature. But it’s a start. The impression I got from this was that it is a temporary halt in immigration from those areas to allow time for the creation of a broader policy that will be much more effective. The refugee program will be overhauled, placing a higher priority on those who were persecuted for their religion in those countries, primarily Christians and Jews. Anyone following the news in Germany and broader Europe now can see that they have a massive crisis on their hands. There are a million ‘refugees’ in Germany alone, and we are only beginning to see the extent of the damage they will cause. Trump is right in wanting America to be safe and secure, without people having to worry every time they walk down the street, without having to worry that ISIS is sending operatives here through our own refugee program. I don’t think this is an effective or efficient way to do things, but hopefully the plan he comes up with will keep us safe.January 29, 2017 3:39 pm at 3:39 pm #1213224
lightbrite: What ground are you saying that on? As far as I can see, he simply made a campaign promise and intends on keeping it.January 29, 2017 3:55 pm at 3:55 pm #1213225kollelmanParticipant
First of all, stop listening to MSM. They continuously trick the public. They believe that we are all stupid and they can pump us with propaganda to do their bidding and become “useful idiots” for them.
Secondly, the ban is for 120 days and fully within the President’s power to do. The list of 7 countries were selected by Obama. Trump’s ban did not mention any country except war-torn Syria, which is currently involved in a civil war. Those terrorists were funded and armed by Obama. Research Rep. Tulsi Gabbard who just came back from Syria and saw first hand.
Additionally, as mentioned above, there is no relation between jihadis and lehavdil, Jews who were escaping gas chambers.
In regard to Saudi Arabia not being banned, ask Obama why he didn’t ban them. Maybe Trump will add them later. Personally, I think Trump is baiting the Left once again. Once they criticize him, and falsely ignore that Obama did the same thing and hand-picked these countries, they will be stuck once again in the corner. Then they will look for the next Trump action to criticize and think that the stupid Americans will forget.
The key is to do your own research and realize that the only “fake news” coming out these days, is the MSM. Seriously!January 29, 2017 4:12 pm at 4:12 pm #1213226
zahavasdad: President Trump’s Executive Order DOES differentiate Muslims from non-Muslims in the seven affected countries. The order specifically states that persecuted religious minorites in those Muslim countries, i.e. Jews and Christians, are exempt and receive priority treatment in receiving US Visas.January 29, 2017 4:18 pm at 4:18 pm #1213227K-cupParticipant
On a side note, how about the Whitehouse officially not mentioning 6 million Jews killed in the Holocaust because “all innocent people suffered” during the Holocaust. I voted Trump, but that statement Literally sounds like a Holocaust deniers prepared it.January 29, 2017 4:56 pm at 4:56 pm #1213228LitvosMember
I’m currently abstaining from any political activity and opinions, but I will only say that I welcome the decision for the executive order. My only concern is for the Jews left in Iraq and Syria and their safety.January 29, 2017 5:09 pm at 5:09 pm #1213229☕ DaasYochid ☕Participant
Litvos, as religious minorities, they are excluded from the ban.January 29, 2017 5:30 pm at 5:30 pm #1213230Avi KParticipant
Lightbrite, see “Hillary Clinton is a threat to religious liberty” by Marc A. Thiessen in the Washington Post. You can google “Hillary Clinton – Religious beliefs have to be changed” to see the video.
Litvos, so far as I know there are no more Jews in Iraq. There may be a handful in Syria. They belong in Israel.January 29, 2017 5:46 pm at 5:46 pm #1213231
Afghanistan isn’t on his list. Neither is Saudi Arabia, as mentioned here. Plus Pakistan. Those are from “news” sites.
Obviously everything is way more complicated than the whole, “We’re not letting terrorists come here. and. This is for our protection” (Summary of Something).
Covert means that we are not privy. Not like transparency with the American people is a good strategy. Surely the POTUS needs to keep some of his agendas behind the scenes. That’s the point.
Maybe he wanted to do more and had barriers. Maybe anything. These are speculations. I don’t know anything except that anything is possible, almost anything B”H.January 29, 2017 6:01 pm at 6:01 pm #1213232LitvosMember
Avi K, I think I read there are a few families in Iraqi Kurdistan left. Despite being a more Jewish-friendly zone, their security is no less vulnerable than it is in the south of Iraq.
DaasYochid – Thank you for clarifying, I had the chance to read the whole text of the executive order on Haaretz (no judgements, please) but I decided to stay away from it. I’m glad they’re excluded, and as Avi K mentioned, their place is in Israel instead.January 29, 2017 6:05 pm at 6:05 pm #1213233hujuParticipant
Re FuturePotus’s first comment: You need to bone up on your history of anti-Semitism. Jews in the US in the first half of the 20th Century (and earlier, and perhaps even today) were suspected of bringing all sorts of ills with them. According to the anti-Semites, we are bloodsuckers, usurers, business tricksters, fraudulators, poisoners of drinking water, kidnappers of Christian children to obtain their blood for our matzah, divided loyalists, gangsters, criminals and rapists (like Mexicans). And there were small handfuls of Jews who in fact fit some of these descriptions. There are a handful of Muslims who are terrorists, but most of the terror in the US since 9/11 has been in your and others’ minds, not in the behavior of the vast majority of Muslim immigrants.
It was wrong to keep out Jews. So how is it right to keep out Muslims?
And, please, don’t tell me I am self-hating. I’m fine with myself, but I am not so sure about some of the rest of us. Some of us are making the mitzvah of Ahavas Yisrael more difficult.January 29, 2017 6:38 pm at 6:38 pm #1213234MammeleParticipant
Iran is host to the most Jews in the Middle East after Israel and Turkey. And they’re on the list, but as a religious minority can be exempted. However, I don’t think it’s easy for them to get out under the current regime.January 29, 2017 7:13 pm at 7:13 pm #1213235
Iran does not restrict Jews from emigrating.
The list of seven countries were set and established by former President Obama and Congress, not by President Trump.January 29, 2017 7:27 pm at 7:27 pm #1213236
Anyone with common sense back then was aware that Jews are none of that. Whereas anyone with common sense now, knows that Islamic terrorism is a danger. You place too much emphasis on emotional logic, rather than intellectual facts. We were no harm to the US, on the contrary, immigrant Jews worked hard for a living and contributed their part. Islamic refugees are paid for by you and me, and many of them (especially ISIS) would also quite enjoy seeing the death, if not killing, you and me. Before anyone responds that it isn’t ISIS, it has been seen again and again both in Europe and the US, that among the refugees are ISIS and other radical Islamic terrorists.
I don’t believe you are self-hating, I think it might be beneficial for you to think more with the facts, and less with emotional reaction.January 29, 2017 8:03 pm at 8:03 pm #1213237
There is a difference between Jews and the refugees because, as one said, at least one terrorist has been found to be hiding amongst the hurt rest.
The Jews in the Holocaust were turned away because of other reasons. Rather than the refugees, I find a stronger similarity between the treatment of Mexicans today compared to Jews in WWII, in the Trump Administration.January 29, 2017 8:04 pm at 8:04 pm #12132382scentsParticipant
I have not read many articles on this however, from what I understand, here are the facts.
These countries have been marked by Obama and Congress as the seven countries that harbor terrorists.
They can still come in to our country, only will be taken aside for further questioning and comprehensive screening.
They will be moved through the process as quick as possible, either to be released or to sent back.
109 people from these countries were taken aside, most of them were processed through the system already.
Not sure how accurate all of this is, however supposedly this is the plan.
By the way, I am sure that Israel probably has much more comprehensive screening and questioning for people coming in from these countries. Even I was taken aside and asked which shabboss my Bar Mitzva was, and in which hall it was.. and i was coming from the USA.January 29, 2017 8:32 pm at 8:32 pm #1213239
2scents: Shhh… you just revealed Israel’s secret screening questions.January 29, 2017 10:07 pm at 10:07 pm #1213240HealthParticipant
MW13 -“I mean, shutting out — there are 8 million children in the world right now who are refugees. Eight million. And if you shut out Syrian refugees at this moment, it’s like shutting the Jews out during World War II.”
lightbrite -“Wondering… For those who voted for Trump, what are your thoughts about his immigration ban thus far?”
Why didn’t the Western world do the right thing in the first place?!?
All they had to do was wipe out all the radicals. They wouldn’t have to even used nukes.
But they would have to take off the gloves, but it wasn’t PC!
Then there wouldn’t be any refugees.
But dreaming how Liberalism has all the answers!January 29, 2017 10:34 pm at 10:34 pm #1213241
This is why people are investing their money to one day live in outer space.January 29, 2017 11:34 pm at 11:34 pm #1213243akupermaParticipant
The United States routinely excluded refugees who happened to have been Nazis. In fact, every so often someone is still getting deported because they were a Nazi. Again exceptions were made for Nazis who were willing to serve American interests (the CIA and NASA are infamous for recruiting such persons).
Most Syrian Muslims are very bigoted against both Jews and Christians. The main reason the liberals “love” them is explained by the “enemy of my enemy is my friend”. The US should welcome religious minorities fleeing Islam, and Islamic defectors rejecting the normative (what we call “radical” to be polite) and dominant version of Islam. But the typical Muslim refugees who has not rejected Islam should be given humanitarian assistance, and sent home when the war ends (or when an Islamic country accepts them).January 30, 2017 3:54 am at 3:54 am #1213244mw13Participant
You place too much emphasis on emotional logic, rather than intellectual facts.
by Alex Nowrasteh:
Foreigners from those seven nations have killed zero Americans in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1975 and the end of 2015. Six Iranians, six Sudanese, two Somalis, two Iraqis, and one Yemini have been convicted of attempting or carrying out terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. Zero Libyans or Syrians have been convicted of planning a terrorist attack on U.S. soil during that time period…
Many other foreigners have been convicted of terrorism-related offenses that did not include planning a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. One list released by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) details 580 terror-related convictions since 9/11…
Second, only 40 of the 580 convictions (6.9 percent) were for foreigners planning a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Seeking to join a foreign terrorist group overseas, material support for a foreign terrorist, and seeking to commit an act of terror on foreign soil account for 180 of the 580 convictions (31 percent)…
Third, 92 of the 580 convictions (16 percent) were for U.S. born citizens. No change in immigration law, visa limitations, or more rigorous security checks would have stopped them…
The measures taken here will have virtually no effect on improving U.S. national security.January 30, 2017 6:52 am at 6:52 am #1213245MammeleParticipant
I’m conflicted about the ban, but I have one question. If we take America out of the equation and pretend to be Europe for a moment, how would the terror stats by refugees/immigrants by country of origin hold up?
Meaning let’s assume America is relatively safe now, if our borders become as porous as Europe’s were to the flood of refugees, how do we know we won’t suffer greatly ch”v then.January 30, 2017 1:51 pm at 1:51 pm #1213246
mw13: To bring an example: ISIS is in Iraq, therefore it makes sense to place a temporary ban on the area until a more extensive solution is in place. Many, many of the people in those countries would like to kill every one of us, I don’t see how you can defend them. They yell “Death to America” in the streets, and would love to actualize that. In my opinion, this ban wasn’t nearly comprehensive enough, hopefully after this one ends, he’ll put a more effective solution in place. But this is certainly a step in the right direction.January 30, 2017 3:22 pm at 3:22 pm #1213247HealthParticipant
Shutting Refugees out of America
It’s also for their protection. Look what just happened in Quebec city. If they can’t come in, no one can terrorize them!January 30, 2017 3:33 pm at 3:33 pm #1213248yehudayonaParticipant
Health, refugees by definition are people who are trying to get away from harm. It’s obviously safer to be a Muslim in America or Canada than in Syria or Iraq.January 30, 2017 3:54 pm at 3:54 pm #1213249
You don’t need to be a bleeding-heart liberal to be genuinely disturbed by the tremendous humanitarian crisis that is taking place in the world, and by the attitudes to these refugees taken by our elected officials. Of course our government has a responsibility to keep its citizens safe, but does that mean we have no practical responsibility to help others facing mortal danger? Are you perfectly understanding of the decisions of the many governments (including our own), during WWII, to send back thousands of Jewish refugees to Europe? Don’t forget that US government officials, including FDR, believed that these immigrants posed a real national security threat. If you’re perfectly morally content with this executive order, I don’t see how you could be troubled about FDR’s decisions during WWII. To me that is very sad….January 30, 2017 4:44 pm at 4:44 pm #1213250
For all the frightened world out there.. Just been released for publication… (I have to be careful.. my job in the WH is in jeopardy if I leak too much..)
The President ???? ????, has no intentions of turning his back, indeed our collective backs, on needy and desperate individuals out there. He’s just coming out with these forceful edicts, one after another, to show the world out there that America is not something to be trifled with.. And indeed, he is reaching his goal.. He has the WHOLE WORLD in his palm.. or getting there.. Once he attains his goal, once he get America “secure” (????? ???), once he has established a ???? ??????, he will most certainly back down, and show the world out benevolent, gracious side. We cannot extend ourselves and provide for the world while someone on a donkey out there is ramming airplanes into our towers… Clean house first, then be gracious…
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Durchgang
Washington, District of ColumbiaJanuary 30, 2017 7:05 pm at 7:05 pm #1213251
Little Froggie is making a joke of what is a serious matter to many. I hope that when you are suffering, others give your concerns more respect than you can offer them.January 30, 2017 7:17 pm at 7:17 pm #1213252Lilmod UlelamaidParticipant
M – he’s not making a joke; he’s explaining why he thinks the ban is necessary in order to prevent suffering. He actually took the effort to do so in a nice way instead of attacking those who are attacking those who made the ban.January 30, 2017 7:47 pm at 7:47 pm #1213253
lilmod ulelamaid: If it is not a joke (which I still believe it is), then the claims sound completely fabricated. Is there someone out there that knows that the president “will most certainly back down, and show the world out benevolent, gracious side”? Based on what would anyone write that? With the exception of one story from 20 years ago, what examples of benevolence and graciousness have you seen from this man?
In any case, here is a quote written by a member of congress about Poland in the 1920’s to keep Jews from coming to the US: “It is impossible to overestimate the peril of the class of emigrants coming from this part of the world, and every possible care and safeguard should be used to keep out the undesirables.” There are plenty more where this came from, both from that period and later. Are you at peace with the refusal of many governments to take in Jewish refugees from Germany, Poland, etc during WWII?January 30, 2017 8:00 pm at 8:00 pm #1213254
Do I look like the one to jest?!? Have you ever seen a joke from me? I’m speaking with the voice of reason, clarity of vision. One that goes beyond the nearsightedness, narrowness of mind, focusing on the nebach, emotional pictures the media has plastered all over, playing out to the sympathetic feelings of the blithering masses out there.
Every law leaves some in discomfort, displeasure, disadvantage, deprivation etc. A law is made to benefit the LARGER picture, as much to a degree having to deprive the fewest possible. Hey – I’d love to steal. Why shouldn’t I? Is it right that I shouldn’t be able to go to another’s car and just drive it away??? So that’s where laws come in to play. Protect the majority, and if need be, at the expense of the few.
The innocents here trying to come in to our land, are coming from places known to be dangerous to America. They have caused quite some damage, lasting damage. Much heartbreak, anguish, pain and suffering to innocents going about their normal life. Here and elsewhere. They have a dangerous, warped agenda: to kill, plunder, ravage, destroy, FOR ITS SAKE! No, the dangerous ones do not value life, at all. Neither their victims’ nor their own. They’re a hard bunch to tackle, conventional means to not apply. No they don’t portray themselves as the enemy ready for a battle. They’re constantly under cover, trying to infiltrate, undermine, hiding, blasting away at the maximum possible damage to total innocents.
We’re just trying to put in place a safeguard, a lasting barrier to the self destruct, wild savages out there. To work out something that will satisfy all sides. It’ll take time to work out.. that’s how things go…
I truly thank this President, who’s the first to call a spade a spade. One to call this threat by it’s name. One to have a bigger, larger view. One who’s a doer. And one who’s not afraid to voice his stand in the face of the many opened up minds of others.January 30, 2017 8:07 pm at 8:07 pm #1213255
I thought LF was a girlJanuary 30, 2017 8:08 pm at 8:08 pm #1213256
No one ever alleged or seriously entertained the thought that admitting Jews to America before either WWI or WWII would pose a risk to the lives of Americans.
The comparison is completely off the mark and irrelevant.January 30, 2017 8:51 pm at 8:51 pm #1213257ubiquitinParticipant
“No one ever alleged or seriously entertained the thought that admitting Jews to America before either WWI or WWII would pose a risk to the lives of Americans.”
Youve made this false claim before. IT was certainly alleged ( see quote by M above there are many many others.
In fact A NAzi spy DID try to infiltrate as a Jew
google: Herbert Karl Friedrich Bahr
Of course many Jews were Communists too.January 30, 2017 9:02 pm at 9:02 pm #1213258
Thanks ubiquitin. I didn’t consider that. Touche.
Imagine the opinions of children witnessing the rejection today. How will they relay their trauma to their children? Remember when America wouldn’t help us when they had the chance.
Alas.January 30, 2017 9:14 pm at 9:14 pm #1213259Lilmod UlelamaidParticipant
LB – LF is a man.
Thank you for posting a post on this thread that I can actually read and respond to (no patience for long political posts).January 30, 2017 9:29 pm at 9:29 pm #1213260
LB, I didn’t think any of these were as long as… (just sayin)January 30, 2017 9:30 pm at 9:30 pm #1213261
Little Frog, I think you are making it clear that you would be totally understanding of FDR’s reluctance to accept Jews during WWII to this country. You would say something like “Every law leaves some in discomfort, displeasure, disadvantage, deprivation etc. A law is made to benefit the LARGER picture, as much to a degree having to deprive the fewest possible.” The immigrants don’t speak English (true), will compete for our jobs (true), might become a burden on us (true), can’t all be vetted with perfect accuracy (true), etc. And thousands of Jews were sent back to die under the German reign of terror, as they indeed happened.
I understand that there are legit reasons for our being unable to accommodate all refugees. Maybe some are dangerous. Maybe the US, already trillions of dollars in debt, can’t afford to take in more people. Maybe some of the “refugees” are perfectly safe at home. Who knows. But if you were a person genuinely pained at heart by the suffering of innocent people, the way that I and so many yidden wished that the US and other countries had been 70 years ago, then as human beings, rachmanim bnei rachmanim, would be pained by the atrocities taking place in Syria and other countries, and we would not make jokes about this.January 30, 2017 9:39 pm at 9:39 pm #1213262
No one actually believed immigrant Jews admitted to America in the run up to WWI and WWII posed a risk to kill Americans.
The “perils” “M” quoted were not about risk to American lives posed by immigrant Jews. It was about the perils dirty Jews posed to good Christian Americans.
A Nazi could have attempted to pretend to be a Swiss Christian if posing as a Jew wasn’t available. It has nothing to do with being Jewish. And you can ban Communists, including Communist Jews and Christians, without targeting Jews.January 30, 2017 10:22 pm at 10:22 pm #1213263It is Time for TruthParticipant
There are some ,but only some, parallels to today
Jews were disproportionately active and supported communist oriented organizations in overwhelming numbersJanuary 30, 2017 10:25 pm at 10:25 pm #1213264rabbiofberlinParticipant
Joseph-as always, you are totally wrong. If you think that no one believed that Jews posed a risk to Americans in the thirties, you are still smoking the same thing that you have been smoking all along. There was a genuine pro-Nazi crowd then, led by Lindbergh with their slogan : “America First” (what a coincidence!) and we, the Jewish people, were the main victims. From the Evian conference in 1938 when no nation- not even that benevolent USA- volunteered to accept Jews to the turning back of the St.Louis, on FDR’s order.to the refusal to lift a finger in bombing the train lines to Auschwitz, all of it was colored by a deep anti-Semitism in the US. And the pretense was the criminal nature of “those Jews”. Sounds like today, when all kind of spurious claims are made about Syrian refuges and the like. It is a stain on America and I, for one, will not be part of it. Let the refugees in!January 30, 2017 10:52 pm at 10:52 pm #1213265
Of course it was anti-semitism; that’s exactly what I’m saying. No one actually believed immigrant Jews would kill Americans.
Immigrants coming from Syria through Turkey HAVE been killing Europeans for the last couple years.January 30, 2017 11:16 pm at 11:16 pm #1213266ubiquitinParticipant
Would you support taking in refugee children?
Saw this going around:
First they came for the muslims, and we said not this time!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.