A serious question

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,026
620
✟78,299.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
In 1939 President FDR (D) turned away boatloads of Jewish refugees known to be escaping Nazi genocide in Germany and most Americans (including the Democratic Party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be an acceptable role of a President, and good for the country.

In 1941 FDR (D) ordered the internment of over 100,000 US citizens of Japanese descent, and most Americans (including the Democratic Party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country (though the Germans were not interned because allegedly they did not attack us).

Under Harry Truman (D), millions of illegal Mexican migrant workers were allowed to be legalized and stay or come in order to help harvest US crops, but a little over a million illegal Mexican immigrants were deported during his presidency. No one thought this to be a bad thing or complained or protested the deportations.

Under the 1965 Hart-Celler Act, immigrants trying to get into America were turned away on the basis of Psychiatric background info, possible criminal associations, and if they were gay (the gay part was not rescinded in 1996 while vetting for psychiatric and criminal background checks remained) and most Americans (including the Democratic Party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country.

The ‘Undocumented Aliens Message to the Congress’ submitted August 4, 1977 by Jimmy Carter (D) as President he declared that from that point on the hiring of illegal Immigrants is ILLEGAL, and insisted that we substantially increase resources available to control the Southern border, and other entry points, in order to prevent illegal immigration. Those here that were found suitable and were willing to work would be awarded “temporary worker” status and allowed to apply for citizenship after so many years. Hundreds of thousands were sent back to Mexico.

May 6, 1980 President Jimmy Carter (D) had nearly 200 Cuban people detained in Florida. It turned out after serious vetting that 133 were Criminals and not allowed entrance into the United States. Most Americans (including the Democratic party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country.

From 1994 to 1996 after the Balsero (rafter) crisis of August, 1994, Bill Clinton detained around 20,000 angry Cuban refugees, who had been warehoused at a US base since that time. To avoid inciting another exodus, he ordered that all Cuban rafters would now be intercepted by the U.S. Coast Guard and, for the first time since the Cuban revolution in 1959, repatriated to Havana if they could not qualify for political asylum (after serious vetting they were returned to their mother nation).

In February 1996 (after the first attempt to bomb the twin towers) President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir of Sudan offered Bill Clinton the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas. Clinton turned down the opportunity and this led to 911 (and a number of other Militant Islamic atrocities and many 1,000s of deaths).

Later In 1996 (after the Rawandan fiasco), House Concurrent Resolution 75, passed by a vote of 416-1 on June 15. House members determined the National Islamic Front that rules in Khartoum "is deliberately and systematically committing genocide in southern Sudan." The resolution continues by declaring that "millions have been displaced from their homes," and the Sudan government "is threatening the very survival of a whole generation of southern Sudanese."

Yet following this almost unanimous Congressional concern, President Bill Clinton (D) refused Sudanese refugees entrance to America and sent them all back to Sudan. One group included mostly young people and children who had made a makeshift raft and survived a journey crossing the Atlantic Ocean…they were refused amnesty and were returned to the Islamic government never to be heard from again. BUT….most Americans (including the Democratic party) stood behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country.

Between 2009 and 2015 Barak Obama (by Executive Order) captured and removed more than 2.5 million people from the US through immigration orders, which doesn’t include the number of people who were turned away and/or returned to their home country at the border by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) following the orders of the President. Not one person questioned that “The President” has this authority.

In 2011 Barack Obama refused entrance to most Iraqi refugees for 6 months until passing the rigor of serious vetting and most Americans (including the Democratic party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country.

Where was the outcry? Are today’s protests brainwashing, hypocrisy, or just a result of well-trained short memory? If trump had just flatly denied entrance, like the former Democratic Presidents in the White House, would that have been okay? Why did the Democrats on all these cases feel it was okay for all of them?

Many people are apparently being brainwashed into thinking Mexican or Muslim equals a “race” when in fact neither belief is true. Muslims are of all races, and Mexican is a largely ethnically mixed group of one predominant nationality. The 7 countries in question are all countries shown to either be enemies of the US, or they contain and/or support members of militant Islamic groups such as Al-Qeda and ISIS responsible for death and destruction in over 20 countries worldwide. Why shouldn’t a concerned President (like all these Democrat Presidents) be allowed to insist on serious vetting before allowing entrance. They are not being denied entrance, they are being investigated first. This has been the approach of many Democratic presidents. Why was it not “WRONG” when it was the Democrats? Shouldn’t we eliminate the obvious double standards when we find them? Obviously one set of laws is only insisted on when our personal double standards are threatened.
 

brinny

everlovin' shiner of light in dark places
Site Supporter
Mar 23, 2004
249,064
114,495
✟1,345,013.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
In 1939 President FDR (D) turned away boatloads of Jewish refugees known to be escaping Nazi genocide in Germany and most Americans (including the Democratic Party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be an acceptable role of a President, and good for the country.

In 1941 FDR (D) ordered the internment of over 100,000 US citizens of Japanese descent, and most Americans (including the Democratic Party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country (though the Germans were not interned because allegedly they did not attack us).

Under Harry Truman (D), millions of illegal Mexican migrant workers were allowed to be legalized and stay or come in order to help harvest US crops, but a little over a million illegal Mexican immigrants were deported during his presidency. No one thought this to be a bad thing or complained or protested the deportations.

Under the 1965 Hart-Celler Act, immigrants trying to get into America were turned away on the basis of Psychiatric background info, possible criminal associations, and if they were gay (the gay part was not rescinded in 1996 while vetting for psychiatric and criminal background checks remained) and most Americans (including the Democratic Party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country.

The ‘Undocumented Aliens Message to the Congress’ submitted August 4, 1977 by Jimmy Carter (D) as President he declared that from that point on the hiring of illegal Immigrants is ILLEGAL, and insisted that we substantially increase resources available to control the Southern border, and other entry points, in order to prevent illegal immigration. Those here that were found suitable and were willing to work would be awarded “temporary worker” status and allowed to apply for citizenship after so many years. Hundreds of thousands were sent back to Mexico.

May 6, 1980 President Jimmy Carter (D) had nearly 200 Cuban people detained in Florida. It turned out after serious vetting that 133 were Criminals and not allowed entrance into the United States. Most Americans (including the Democratic party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country.

From 1994 to 1996 after the Balsero (rafter) crisis of August, 1994, Bill Clinton detained around 20,000 angry Cuban refugees, who had been warehoused at a US base since that time. To avoid inciting another exodus, he ordered that all Cuban rafters would now be intercepted by the U.S. Coast Guard and, for the first time since the Cuban revolution in 1959, repatriated to Havana if they could not qualify for political asylum (after serious vetting they were returned to their mother nation).

In February 1996 (after the first attempt to bomb the twin towers) President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir of Sudan offered Bill Clinton the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas. Clinton turned down the opportunity and this led to 911 (and a number of other Militant Islamic atrocities and many 1,000s of deaths).

Later In 1996 (after the Rawandan fiasco), House Concurrent Resolution 75, passed by a vote of 416-1 on June 15. House members determined the National Islamic Front that rules in Khartoum "is deliberately and systematically committing genocide in southern Sudan." The resolution continues by declaring that "millions have been displaced from their homes," and the Sudan government "is threatening the very survival of a whole generation of southern Sudanese."

Yet following this almost unanimous Congressional concern, President Bill Clinton (D) refused Sudanese refugees entrance to America and sent them all back to Sudan. One group included mostly young people and children who had made a makeshift raft and survived a journey crossing the Atlantic Ocean…they were refused amnesty and were returned to the Islamic government never to be heard from again. BUT….most Americans (including the Democratic party) stood behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country.

Between 2009 and 2015 Barak Obama (by Executive Order) captured and removed more than 2.5 million people from the US through immigration orders, which doesn’t include the number of people who were turned away and/or returned to their home country at the border by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) following the orders of the President. Not one person questioned that “The President” has this authority.

In 2011 Barack Obama refused entrance to most Iraqi refugees for 6 months until passing the rigor of serious vetting and most Americans (including the Democratic party) were behind him, remained silent, and thought this to be acceptable and good for the country.

Where was the outcry? Are today’s protests brainwashing, hypocrisy, or just a result of well-trained short memory? If trump had just flatly denied entrance, like the former Democratic Presidents in the White House, would that have been okay? Why did the Democrats on all these cases feel it was okay for all of them?

Many people are apparently being brainwashed into thinking Mexican or Muslim equals a “race” when in fact neither belief is true. Muslims are of all races, and Mexican is a largely ethnically mixed group of one predominant nationality. The 7 countries in question are all countries shown to either be enemies of the US, or they contain and/or support members of militant Islamic groups such as Al-Qeda and ISIS responsible for death and destruction in over 20 countries worldwide. Why shouldn’t a concerned President (like all these Democrat Presidents) be allowed to insist on serious vetting before allowing entrance. They are not being denied entrance, they are being investigated first. This has been the approach of many Democratic presidents. Why was it not “WRONG” when it was the Democrats? Shouldn’t we eliminate the obvious double standards when we find them? Obviously one set of laws is only insisted on when our personal double standards are threatened.

Most interesting.

Thank you.
 
Upvote 0

expos4ever

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2008
10,730
5,794
Montreal, Quebec
✟254,429.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Why shouldn’t a concerned President (like all these Democrat Presidents) be allowed to insist on serious vetting before allowing entrance. They are not being denied entrance, they are being investigated first.
I don't believe anyone is objecting to investigating people who want to come to the US. But the "ban" is not the way to proceed - it is clearly a cynical move intended to appeal to the xenophobia of some Americans.
 
Upvote 0

Papias

Listening to TW4
Dec 22, 2005
3,967
985
58
✟57,276.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Why shouldn’t a concerned President (like all these Democrat Presidents) be allowed to insist on serious vetting before allowing entrance.

They already have an extreme vetting process in place.
This Is How the Syrian Refugee Screening Process Works

Yes, they are being barred entry.

Muslims are of all races, and Mexican is a largely ethnically mixed group of one predominant nationality.

Trump shouted again and again that he would put in place "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" He said it himself, over and over - so did he lie to you?

SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR DONALD TRUMP

The 7 countries in question are all countries shown to either be enemies of the US, or they contain and/or support members of militant Islamic groups

Hundreds of countries "contain or support" members of Islamic terrorist groups - including the US itself, Canada, Germany, and so on.

No one has been killed by a terrorist from any of those countries in the US. The countries that actually do supply terrorist to the US are Russia, France, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, and so on - but Trump didn't ban them. Trump makes money off businesses there. The ban shows that he cares nothing for our safety, but only about his own money, and still wants to make a show that will trick his gullible followers. Even conservative business sites noticed that.

These Countries with Business Links to Trump Aren't Part of His Immigration Ban

In 2011 Barack Obama refused entrance to most Iraqi refugees for 6 months ....

Simply false. The comparisons you are making not only distort Trump's travel ban, but are also sometimes false.

Trump’s facile claim that his refugee policy is similar to Obama’s in 2011

I hope that helped with this topic.

Papias
 
  • Winner
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

Greg J.

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mar 2, 2016
3,841
1,907
Southeast Michigan
✟233,164.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The OP is a one-sided statement of events without the reasons on either side for their position. There's a lot more to all of these examples. For example, the U.S. wasn't sure genocide was Hitler's goal until something like a year after the U.S. was at war (late 1942). The war for the U.S. started because the Japanese not the Germans showed themselves and enemy to the U.S. It was easier before Pearl Harbor to hope to stay out of the war in Europe. It is convenient in hindsight to see what would have been best. Communication within the country and internationally was nothing whatsoever like it is now. Prior to December, 1941 Americans didn't want to send its citizens to die in a war for which there was no enemy threatening them. In 1939, the country was still recovering from the Great Depression (1929-) and a previous President had ordered the state department to not let immigrants into the country unless they could show they could support themselves. etc. etc.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

SolomonVII

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2003
23,138
4,918
Vancouver
✟155,006.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
America (and Canada) turned away boatloads of Jewish refugees in those times because of the racism against Jews.
In terms of being on the " so-called right side of history" Democrats have been the party of Jakcson from the very start. They have been the party of the Trail of Tears, of racism, supported by both northern and southern Democrats, the party of Jim Crow, the party of Japanese internment, and the party that is right now creating a country with an undocumented underclass of non-white people to do the dirty work for the privileged and cloistered elites on the cheap. The 'chicken in every pot' of FDR worked in the same way as the calls to go 'back to the fleshpots of Egypt' did in the times of Exodus. Taking advantage of desparate people to enhance one's own power is not what charity entails.
As long as Democrats get a free pass on everything, as long as Democrats continue to politicize institutions like the IRS and the courts, their egregious behavior will continue, and rectification will never be even a remote possibility for all the bad things that plague America.

The nature of the world is such that the West needs a coherent strategy to deal with people who reject Western values As long as Democrats pretend to be the Party of Good, and demonize the Republicans as the Party of Evil, a rational policy in America, or elsewhere, will not be forthcoming.
 
Upvote 0

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,026
620
✟78,299.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
They already have an extreme vetting process in place.
This Is How the Syrian Refugee Screening Process Works

Yes, they are being barred entry.

Trump shouted again and again that he would put in place "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" He said it himself, over and over - so did he lie to you?

SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR DONALD TRUMP



Hundreds of countries "contain or support" members of Islamic terrorist groups - including the US itself, Canada, Germany, and so on.

No one has been killed by a terrorist from any of those countries in the US. The countries that actually do supply terrorist to the US are Russia, France, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, and so on - but Trump didn't ban them. Trump makes money off businesses there. The ban shows that he cares nothing for our safety, but only about his own money, and still wants to make a show that will trick his gullible followers. Even conservative business sites noticed that.

These Countries with Business Links to Trump Aren't Part of His Immigration Ban

Simply false. The comparisons you are making not only distort Trump's travel ban, but are also sometimes false.

Trump’s facile claim that his refugee policy is similar to Obama’s in 2011

I hope that helped with this topic.

Papias

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens.

(f) 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 non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate...

Nuf Said...he has not and is not overstepping his power as the standing President and NO I have not misrepresented history. Jesus having said "You shall know them by their fruits" I did not vote for Donald Trump but this fiasco is simple hypocritical propaganda fueling the angry masses (Many of whom are democrats that did not vote. One of the reasons causing his election). Of it goes to the supreme court he will win...it is within his legal power and right.

Paul
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

expos4ever

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2008
10,730
5,794
Montreal, Quebec
✟254,429.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Whether the ban is legal or not is besides the point. Even if it is, it is a terrible idea that panders to xenophobia and only rouses the passions of Islamic extremists.

If there were an actual evidence-based case that this ban would reduce risk then, perhaps, things would be different. But we also need to bear in mind the humanitarian goal of accepting desperate refugees.

Sam Harris, no fan of Islam as some of you may know, thinks the ban is a bad idea.
 
Upvote 0

Avniel

Doing my part each day by being the best me
Jun 11, 2010
7,219
438
Bronx NYC
✟39,141.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
My parents are Jamaican and I have cousins that are scholars and cousins that break the law. Why is it when a Jamaican kid or any black kid comes into this country if they break any sort of law....even a high school brawl they go back home. I know very few Jamaicans that are on probation but I do know a few other minorities particularly in manhattan that certainly do.

I'm not protesting anything....make it fair. It takes 3 months just to get a visa interview in Jamaica....heavily vetted.

Obama and Hillary have done more damage to minority countries than bush and trump could dream of.
 
Upvote 0