No! There is clear precedent to exclude anyone from this country, for any reason whatsoever. No one has a right to immigrate to the US, and the US has the absolute right to allow, or deny, immigration to anyone for any reason.

Otherwise, what is the purpose of borders, or the concept of nationality?

Yes, in absolute terms we can but the current reality is different in our fight with ISIS. I think it's stupid to ban just using religion even when it's legal.

 

Carter banned and expelled Iranians from this country after the Embassy takeover

Not. He ordered the government to not issue new visas for travel to the US by citizens of Iran, and to not issue new visas to any Iranian in the US with invalid visas. Iranians already in the US with valid visas weren't expelled.

 

Now we are back to the original question. Are we so afraid we would consider doing this?
Anyway it is a subject for the court. But it will never get there.
I need to go check on my oil stockpile now. Back in a minute.

 

Not. He ordered the government to not issue new visas for travel to the US by citizens of Iran, and to not issue new visas to any Iranian in the US with invalid visas. Iranians already in the US with valid visas weren't expelled.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=31732

Unless you had a permanent resident visa you had to leave when it expired.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33233

Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.

 

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=31732

Unless you had a permanent resident visa you had to leave when it expired.

Non permanent visas are supposed to be temporary.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33233

Pretty much what I said. They were deported after their visas expired. But those with valid visas, resident visas and those who naturalized were not expelled.

 

No! There is clear precedent to exclude anyone from this country, for any reason whatsoever. No one has a right to immigrate to the US, and the US has the absolute right to allow, or deny, immigration to anyone for any reason.

Otherwise, what is the purpose of borders, or the concept of nationality?

I think questioning immigrants on their religious status is stupid, especially when the religion they practice allows (and encourages) them to lie if it suits their interests and needs:

"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them". (Qur’an 3:28)

“Anyone who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief,- except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty.” (Qur’an 16:106) This verse establishes the principle that a Muslim can lie about being a Muslim if he believes that he will be harmed if his Muslim identity becomes known. Qur’an 40:28130 provides an example of someone who hid his faith in this way. This principle is, extended in the hadiths to what might be termed offensive deception, gaining people’s trust by pretending not to be a Muslim and then harming them.

“[This is] An announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. (Qur'an 9:3)

 

I think questioning immigrants on their religious status is stupid, especially when the religion they practice allows (and encourages) them to lie if it suits their interests and needs:

It is evident from reading the Bible that it does give permission for one to lie, to save innocent lives, to use deception in war and to shield people from being harmed, persecuted and other examples.

Nobody's perfect.

source : http://discover-the-truth.com/2015/01/22/holy-bible-allows-lying-deception/

 

.................. Is this a hang over from 9/11 or is it just media hype.

Both terrorists and the news media benefit from peoples fear. So, am I saying the media purposefully promotes fear for its own gain? Maybe. I am certain that the new media does nothing to calm peoples fear. The last time the new media had a moral compass was back in the days of Walter Cronkite. Back then you would actually feel better after you watched the news. Today it just makes you feel worse.

 

Actually it's required by law with regard to immigration of refugees. You cannot be accepted as refugee with passing a religious test. And anyway it's perfectly legal to exclude anyone for any reason and it can be done by presidential decree - no need to bother with congress. Our constitution protects us citizens but does not extend any rights to non-citizens.

If Trump stumbled at all, and I'm not sure he did, it was in not just calling for a moratorium on ALL immigration. We've done that before for long periods. I think he would have gotten wide support for that without all the drama. But I suspect the drama was well-calculated. Trump doesn't have to spend on a campaign - he's getting coverage for free.

I also think he's paving a smoother path for whoever comes from behind, such as Cruz.

There are actually several precedents dating back to President #2. Then there are the laws, passed by a Democratic congress for a Democratic president, specifically granting the president the authority to exclude any group, for any reason, from entering the U.S..

Interestingly, while the political establishment of both sides is decrying Trump's announcement, one of the Democratic congress critters (Reed? -- heard the story while I was driving and haven't been able to track it down) was making hay about how that fact that 63% of white Americans supported Trump's plan proves that whites are racist. What was very conveniently left out was that the same poll showed that something like 80% of black Americans supported it and 90% of Latino Americans supported it. If anyone runs across that story, let me know. I'm just not using the right key words to bring it up out of the noise.

 

People from Syria should be persona non-gratis.

Same with other countries occupied by ISIS.

It's not about religion.

 

Got to be careful what you kick. You may have to kiss it.

 

People from Syria should be persona non-gratis.

Same with other countries occupied by ISIS.

It's not about religion.

But why do you want to do that? Are you afraid of what they might do? Are you just angry? Or what?

 

Why do you need it explained to you?

 

Why do you need it explained to you?

Curious, That's why I started the thread.

 

But why do you want to do that? Are you afraid of what they might do? Are you just angry? Or what?

And why should we throw caution to the wind and not be nearly as careful in vetting people we let come in as we have historically been? Back during the Bosnia/Croatia/Herzegovina war people that applied for political asylum in the U.S. frequently had to wait five to eight years before having it granted -- I worked with several of them when I was at the Academy -- and no one back then had not only announced the plan to slip attackers into the refuge stream, but demonstrated the ability to do so successfully.

Look at what our own lax policies have brought us -- we decided that people coming in on fiancé visa didn't even need to show up for any kind of an interview with a visa official (my wife had to go through several and she wasn't my fiancé, but my actual spouse -- and she was coming from a country that is an ally of the United States). It'll probably never be known whether the old process would have actually flagged the San Bernardino killer that came in completely unopposed that way, but we damn sure know that the current lax policy completely failed to do so.

 

Yes, in absolute terms we can but the current reality is different in our fight with ISIS. I think it's stupid to ban just using religion even when it's legal.

Yes. But suggesting it as a presidential campaign proposal is absolute political genius.

 

Ron,

Are you personally and financially responsible for those immigrants should one commit a crime?

 

And why should we throw caution to the wind and not be nearly as careful in vetting people we let come in as we have historically been? Back during the Bosnia/Croatia/Herzegovina war people that applied for political asylum in the U.S. frequently had to wait five to eight years before having it granted -- I worked with several of them when I was at the Academy -- and no one back then had not only announced the plan to slip attackers into the refuge stream, but demonstrated the ability to do so successfully.

Look at what our own lax policies have brought us -- we decided that people coming in on fiancé visa didn't even need to show up for any kind of an interview with a visa official (my wife had to go through several and she wasn't my fiancé, but my actual spouse -- and she was coming from a country that is an ally of the United States). It'll probably never be known whether the old process would have actually flagged the San Bernardino killer that came in completely unopposed that way, but we damn sure know that the current lax policy completely failed to do so.

Fair enough. So you would ban them because they have killed some people, but so have a lot of other people and yet your not as excited about them. Why not?
She was from Pakistan by the way so Joe's formula wouldn't work. I think he was from Illinois, so for sure it wouldn't work for him. So are we back to exporting them because a couple of the mass shooters we have had were Muslim?

 

The terrorist are already here, as proven in California. We should not let more unknown immigrants into the US until we have a better way of vetting them. We are at war with an enemy that has stated that they will kill us. Less unknowns immigrants in the US equals better odds at finding and stopping the terrorist that are here now.

I wish Trump would have been a little more tactful with his statement.

The media only wants to make a poorly made comment worse. The media is not our friend in the fight against ISIS.

 

Ron,

Are you personally and financially responsible for those immigrants should one commit a crime?

No more than you are for the next guy that shoots up a school full of little kids.