Steve Gern on executive order

[Evmetro]

I saw Steve Gern's video on Trump's executive order on Hannity tonight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avLnLnTGtco

Is this a video that both righties and lefties can appreciate? Are the folks who Steve Gern is talking to the ones who lefties are so anxious to let into America ?

[Peter1469]

I saw that- I think he is 100% correct.

[Evmetro]

I saw that- I think he is 100% correct.


It will be interesting to see what the lefties think about this one, since it is so hard to dispute the guy's point. We might not see much lefty action on this thread...

[Evmetro]

If nothing else, 44 million+ views is pretty impressive for a video of any topic!

[Peter1469]

He did get attention.

[Evmetro]

I wonder why there are no lefty replies on this thread? A picture is worth a thousand words...

[NapRover]

The ban should be permanent, not temporary. What good does it serve to bring murdering American-haters over here?

[ripmeister]

I don't doubt what this guy has to say is true but IMO he is overgeneralizing. I think a lot of people what simple solutions such as what Nap proposes like a blanket, permanent ban for what are complex issues. Generally speaking when one argues for a position based on a certain premise all one need do is show an example of where that premise is inaccurate. I would simply ask then what about the local Iraqi who has assisted the US while there, putting his and his families well being at risk. That's but one example. Do we exclude them when they request sanctuary?


The Donald is calling for his "extreme vetting" but based on the data so far the vetting process must be pretty successful when you consider that none of the countries on the list have spawned an attack within the US. That is a fact so it raises the question that short of an outright ban what exactly does "extreme vetting" mean? How are we to be made more safe when the bar is already at 0?

There is no doubt that this issue is complex but it seems to me that many including the POTUS want simple answers to complex questions and want to validate those answers via a stoking of fear in people. Frankly, its an irrational fear when one looks at the facts. I'm much more afraid of the possibility of a "home grown" attack than one that the supposed solution put forth by Trump is likely to occur.

[hanger4]

I don't doubt what this guy has to say is true but IMO he is overgeneralizing. I think a lot of people what simple solutions such as what Nap proposes like a blanket, permanent ban for what are complex issues. Generally speaking when one argues for a position based on a certain premise all one need do is show an example of where that premise is inaccurate. I would simply ask then what about the local Iraqi who has assisted the US while there, putting his and his families well being at risk. That's but one example. Do we exclude them when they request sanctuary?


The Donald is calling for his "extreme vetting" but based on the data so far the vetting process must be pretty successful when you consider that none of the countries on the list have spawned an attack within the US. That is a fact so it raises the question that short of an outright ban what exactly does "extreme vetting" mean? How are we to be made more safe when the bar is already at 0?

There is no doubt that this issue is complex but it seems to me that many including the POTUS want simple answers to complex questions and want to validate those answers via a stoking of fear in people. Frankly, its an irrational fear when one looks at the facts. I'm much more afraid of the possibility of a "home grown" attack than one that the supposed solution put forth by Trump is likely to occur.

Since 9/11, 72 individuals from the seven mostly Muslim countries covered by President Trump's "extreme vetting" executive order have been convicted of terrorism.

Somalia: 20 — Yemen: 19 — Iraq: 19 — Syria: 7 — Iran: 4 — Libya: 2 — Sudan: 1

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/report-72-convicted-of-terrorism-from-trump-7-mostly-muslim-countries/article/2614582

[ripmeister]

Since 9/11, 72 individuals from the seven mostly Muslim countries covered by President Trump's "extreme vetting" executive order have been convicted of terrorism.

Somalia: 20 — Yemen: 19 — Iraq: 19 — Syria: 7 — Iran: 4 — Libya: 2 — Sudan: 1

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/report-72-convicted-of-terrorism-from-trump-7-mostly-muslim-countries/article/2614582

Well if you want to use a tabloid as your source then so be it. I reject such. The funny part is the writer putting forth the legal argument. That was pretty funny.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Washington_Examiner

[hanger4]

Well if you want to use a tabloid as your source then so be it. I reject such. The funny part is the writer putting forth the legal argument. That was pretty funny.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Washington_Examiner

The numbers were from a report from the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration.

Whatever.

[Evmetro]

I don't doubt what this guy has to say is true but IMO he is overgeneralizing.

Which part was this guy overgeneralizing?

[ripmeister]

Which part was this guy overgeneralizing?
That because he spoke to a few dudes who said what they said was apparently reason for a ban.

[ripmeister]

The numbers were from a report from the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration.

Whatever.

This was a report put together by the "Center for Immigration Studies" based on some of Sessions committee work. For those interested in looking at that original report go look at it thru the link. Also take the time to look at the rebuttals. If what you claim was as you call it a terrorist incident then why didn't the Presidents lawyers bring forth that evidence to the judge as a retort to his claim that no terrorist incidents had occurred.

[Evmetro]

That because he spoke to a few dudes who said what they said was apparently reason for a ban.

I was all over these Muslim countries during Desert Storm and later, which is why I was eager to post this guy's video. He is right on the mark, and he is not full of it. Lefties in the USA want to think that Muslims are just like the Smith's or the Jones's who live next door and go to church on Sunday, but this is not how things really are. Muslims in their natural habitat are absolutely NOTHING like this, and you really don't want to have them make the US into their natural habitat. Lefties who have never been outside of the USA want to call the vets who have been right up in the action liars, but this is a big mistake. There is a reason Why the video has 50 million views, and I can tell you that it is not because some lefty thinks he is lying.

[hanger4]

This was a report put together by the "Center for Immigration Studies" based on some of Sessions committee work. For those interested in looking at that original report go look at it thru the link. Also take the time to look at the rebuttals. If what you claim was as you call it a terrorist incident then why didn't the Presidents lawyers bring forth that evidence to the judge as a retort to his claim that no terrorist incidents had occurred.

The numbers in the report were from the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration.

"a retort to his claim that no terrorist incidents had occurred" is irrelevant because;

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

[Bethere]

This was a report put together by the "Center for Immigration Studies" based on some of Sessions committee work. For those interested in looking at that original report go look at it thru the link. Also take the time to look at the rebuttals. If what you claim was as you call it a terrorist incident then why didn't the Presidents lawyers bring forth that evidence to the judge as a retort to his claim that no terrorist incidents had occurred.

And why didn't doj cite the 1952 law in their briefs?

"I know!" said bethere. "Because it wasn't relevant. "

http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-the-law-backs-a-president-s-power-on-1486497202-htmlstory.html

[hanger4]

And why didn't doj cite the 1952 law in their briefs?

"I know!" said bethere. "Because it wasn't relevant. "

http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-the-law-backs-a-president-s-power-on-1486497202-htmlstory.html

Another link ??

403 Forbidden
Code: AccessDenied
Message: Access Denied
RequestId: 302DBF183D2F13A3
HostId: mKQLBg2GCPlJ/qmCvzj4guVqrkDX3PcHyDQ9UTcJiXJA9gtW4ClRNGAvwlK/JDji2pJvajTmsaQ=

[Docthehun]

I saw that- I think he is 100% correct.

I agree. However, I don't think many of them have any desire or means to come here and do any significant damage. Over there, you probably would be killed in a heartbeat. But that's true in many countries around world and not because they're Muslim countries. We need the help of the many good, Muslim Americans, to whom we're essentially saying, "You're no longer welcome." Seems that in the not so distant past, I heard essentially the same thing from a European leader.

[Docthehun]

Another link ??

403 Forbidden
Code: AccessDenied
Message: Access Denied
RequestId: 302DBF183D2F13A3
HostId: mKQLBg2GCPlJ/qmCvzj4guVqrkDX3PcHyDQ9UTcJiXJA9gtW4ClRNGAvwlK/JDji2pJvajTmsaQ=

Just tried it; worked fine.

[Peter1469]

The average Iraqi wouldn't. But a radicalized on (ones) may try to slip into the refugee stream. Also likely just someone who intends to come here to be a recruiter.
I agree. However, I don't think many of them have any desire or means to come here and do any significant damage. Over there, you probably would be killed in a heartbeat. But that's true in many countries around world and not because they're Muslim countries. We need the help of the many good, Muslim Americans, to whom we're essentially saying, "You're no longer welcome." Seems that in the not so distant past, I heard essentially the same thing from a European leader.

[hanger4]

Just tried it; worked fine.

Did you click the 'read more' button ??

[Docthehun]

Did you click the 'read more' button ??

No, I just clicked on the link.