by Jack

911wtc-southtowerBecause there has been so much lying and misinformation about the Presidents order on immigration we need to lay out the facts.

First big lie:  This is a BAN on MUSLIMS!   If it were we would have somewhere between 47 and 51 countries on the banned list.  Only people from countries where their governments are in some kind of chaos that makes verifying their personal information on  VISA applications unreliable have been affected.   In total, only 7 countries fall into this category.  Those countries are all well known for being hotbeds of terrism, have ongoing terrorist activities and strongly anti-US sentiments.   This ban may inconvenience some people, but it makes no sense to put these applicants’ travel concerns ahead of the safety concerns for American citizens.

Second big lie:  This Presidential order is unconstitutional!   Under the Constitution, Article 1 powers were given to the Executive branch of government (Office of President). The president was given broad powers inherent to his role as the Commander in Chief.  This means he has the authority to stop or exclude any immigration from any country he feels is necessary for our national security.    This happened in 2011 for a 6 month period under then President Barrack Obama.   Presidents have blocked immigration from certain countries on 6 prior occasions.

Federal law allows the president to bar entry to any immigrant “or any class” of immigrants if he deems them “detrimental to the interests of the United States,” and to “impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate,” according to the law:

U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens: “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.”

Third big lie:  This is sheer bigotry!   Absolutely no evidence of that, please read the above more carefully.   This is about a process and national security.   Obviously, it is necessary to assure information contained on a travel VISA is truthful and if it can’t it raises the question of national security.   But, the facts speak louder that words.  Of those persons seeking entry from a limited number of countries in turmoil and conflict, only 180 persons are being delayed or have been denied entry.   Consider, there are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, only 180 have been blocked from entry into the USA at this very moment.

Every nation has their own requirements for vetting travelers and immigrants and every nation has at times blocked entry of certain people holding questionable documents.   This was especially true during WWII.  muslimss democracy-replacing-shariah

Right now, Al Qaeda, ISSIS and at least a dozen other terrorist organizations have declared war on America.  We’ve been attacked many times by these terrorists and their affiliates and many more attacks have been thwarted, so the threat is real and ongoing.

As a result of these terror attacks, thousands of innocent lives in America have been lost and many Americans have been maimed, their lives forever changed.   Billions of dollars in destruction has been wraught here and all because of radical Islamic terrorism.   To seeks ways to protect ourselves and do the best we can to prevent future attacks, while acting within the scope of the Constitution,  is not unreasonable.

If you are of sound mind and you have read the above carefully, then you know the concerns raised by liberals and Muslim protesters are founded more in hysteria and politics than reality.  President Trump said that in 90 days this situation would be resolved when more effective vetting procedure for VISA’s will be in place.   It does not affect Green Card holders.


This entry was posted in Religion and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Bryan H. says:

    The concerns have not just been raised by “liberals and Muslim protesters” and it is dishonest of you to say that. Republicans have spoken out against this as well. If it were really for national security, Trump would have consulted his own Secretary of Defense on it, but he didn’t. It was written by Steve Bannon of the notoriously anti-Muslim Breitbart. Yep, we’re letting extremist bloggers shape our laws now because Trump has no idea what he’s doing. If you think the reality star has any realistic ideas on how to improve our vetting process, or that he is listening to anyone who does, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

    • J Soden says:

      Your Kool-Aid glass needs a refill . . . . .

    • Post Scripts says:

      “The concerns have not just been raised by “liberals and Muslim protesters” and it is dishonest of you to say that. ” Chris

      Pffttttt… says you. Always trying with the red herring, well, it was not dishonest and for the purposes of this article and brevity it was accurate.

      “Yep, we’re letting extremist bloggers shape our laws now”

      Chris, the law existed long before blogging was invented, long before the internet and even long before you were born. The law is quite clear and obvious. So, don’t try to lie to folks here. I posted the law for everyone to read…including you. Go read it.

  2. J Soden says:

    To all those “protesters,” I suggest you READ the order instead of relying on loonies with an agenda to grind.
    Or are you even able to read???????

  3. Tina says:

    Selling bridges would be a better use of your time. The executive order was signed at the Pentagon in the presence of the defense secretary. It’s highly unlikely they never spoke of it’s contents and much more likely they were on the same page.

    The hype surrounding this order is political and the pot is being stirred by activists, community organizers (even Obama), and radical leftists in the legal community. None in these groups give a rats behind about the American people, national security, the rule of law, or the plight of innocent people in this war. They care about regaining power and they are rabid for having lost. As usual they do not look to their own failures in the national defense arena.

    • Bryan H. says:

      Why is it unlikely that Trump left his Sec of Defense out of the loop? Because past presidents wouldn’t have done it? Trump isn’t like past presidents. That’s why you voted for him. He doesn’t respect our generals–he said he knows more about ISIS than they do! You can’t expect him to follow protocol when he was voted into office by people who admired his utter disrespect of protocol.

      It’s already been reported by many news outlets that Mattis was not informed. Of course, he could easily clear this up. If it’s confirmed that Trump left Mattis out of the loop on this, will you criticize Trump for it? Or will you continue blindly praising him for “keeping us safe” even though everyone who knows anything says it won’t?

      When Dick Cheney says a policy is a counter-productive overreaction to terror, you know it’s bad. But let me guess: he’s a liberal now, too?

    • Post Scripts says:

      Tina said, “Selling bridges would be a better use of your time.” Ha! Nice retort Tina.

  4. Harold says:

    Before you march, you might wish to consider this:

    “Do you lock your front door at night? Hater!
    Do you have an alarm system at your house? Xenophobe!
    Do you ask who’s ringing your doorbell before letting a visitor in? Rotten bigot!

    That, essentially, is the reaction from the politically charged left to President Trump’s executive order about admitting people from certain countries into the United States. The unhinged outrage from Trump-haters – and there are a lot of them – puts the interests of non-Americans over the security of our citizens. And the administration’s botched roll-out of the new restrictions gave opponents just the excuse they needed to bellow.

    Reduce the argument to a personal level. A homeowner is permitted to refuse entry to anyone he or she doesn’t want in, right? Security systems are intended to keep unwanted visitors out and let the homeowner know who is outside.

    Lots of apartment dwellers have an intercom that rings when someone outside wants to visit. Are those precautions divisive, discriminatory or unconstitutional?

    One of the most horrifying placards I saw during the protests on Trump’s inauguration day read: “No borders. No nations.” Really? Let anyone go anywhere without asking who they are, why they want to come here and what their past actions tell us about them? The notion that America must be open to anyone who decides to visit flies in the face of 21st century reality.

    How do other countries vet visitors? China requires potential guests to fill out a four-page application that asks, among other things, the reason for your visit, the names of your close relatives and what they do, the person who will pay for your trip, your passport number, how long you plan to stay and if you have ever been denied a visa for China in the past? How would the protesters outside American airports react to that kind of quizzing? China doesn’t bother with pretending a democracy, so protests are few and far between.

    Iran, another country that likes to know who’s coming across its borders, asks most of the same questions as China, as well as “Have you ever been infected by any contagious diseases?” and who you plan to meet with in Iran.

    Saudi Arabia gets right to the point, telling female travelers that they cannot enter the country without a male relative accompanying them. Yet Saudi airports have no one outside screeching about their rights.

    And a handful of Muslim-majority countries won’t admit anyone who has an Israeli visa in his or her passport.

    The United States allows a great deal of leeway for protest and disagreement. Those who disagree with the president’s executive order have taken full advantage of those rights, and rightly so. But their argument that the United States, alone among all countries, cannot restrict who comes in from beyond its shores is, quite simply, specious.

    The protests against anything this president does will continue, and that’s fine as long as they’re peaceful. But let’s at least admit that they are not about the issues, but the issuer-in-chief.”

    Above post was from a article published by John Moody who is Executive Vice President, Executive Editor for Fox News.

    He gets it, we understand it, but as for Libs, dew and now the new alias of an egocentric, they all lack the ability to understand or assume any perspective other than their own

    • Libby says:

      “Do you lock your front door at night? Hater!
      Do you have an alarm system at your house? Xenophobe!
      Do you ask who’s ringing your doorbell before letting a visitor in? Rotten bigot!”

      This is ridiculous. We already have perfectly adequate vetting measures in place. Trump/Bannon are deliberately fanning the flames of bigotry (yours and the Islamists) which is evil.

      • Tina says:

        “Perfectly adequate” leaves a lot of room for improvement.

        “Perfectly adequate” represents the disastrous policies that spawned the rise and spread of ISIS, the increase in terror attacks in Europe and the US, and millions of refugees flooding from war zones created by so-called “adequate” polices.

        We’re dedicated to doing much better. We don’t mind leaving you and those “perfectly adequate” policies in the dust.

        • Bryan H. says:

          ISIS is celebrating this executive order because they want the Muslims under their thumb to stay there, and they want to convince them the US hates them. This order helps them.

          And again, if our policies helped create the refugees, how can you say we have no responsibility to help them now?

      • Harold says:

        Actually Lippy, those flames of persecuted bigotry are yours and your ideology alone on this issue, and the fanning is nothing more than your hot air.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Wonderful…so well said… thanks Harold, that was a joy to read! jack

  5. Dewster says:

    THE BIG LIE : Saudi Arabia is our friend. Where did the 911 Money come frome? Sharia law? That contry is one of the worst imposing Shria Law. Why are they not on the list? Oh Yea A Trump Branded Golf course among other things like they buy our arms and give them to the enemy. That is very profitable.

    Why are no countries with a Trump Branded Business on the list?

    Now is the time to claim your allegiance to the USA and Constitution or the White Nationalist coup. This is not going to end peacefully.

    A Dictator who fires anyone trying to settle these issues in court? Fascism is the enemy.

    I will be home this year to defend CA. We will leave the union before we allow White Hate to prevail.

    Mark My words this is a fascist coup and All who support this are on the wrong side of history. The man is trying to create chaos.

    We have no choice but to start an IMPEACH campaign against a dictator
    See ya soon

  6. Dewster says:

    You declared war no one else did. You tore up their countries. yes you for supporting hate.

    I called out Obama , Hillary, now I am calling out the white nationalist party and their pen buffoon. The man is not in charge nor mentally stable. We have a RW blogger as the man going to security meetings now? Pure ignorance that will topple this country.

    • Tina says:

      Typical conspiracy theory horse pucky!


    • Post Scripts says:

      Dewey, you just said Saudi Arabia should have been on the list because they launch terrorists at the USA. But, they were not on the list because we are all buddy-buddy with em over oil and money. Then you come back and say the terrorists are after us because we tore up their country? Dewey do you hear yourself? USA never tore up Saudi Arabia, nor any of the banned terrorist nations, except for Iraq and we rebuilt it better than before, before we left and they took it over. Afghanistan was in response to 9/11 – what are you saying, that we should not have taken on Al Queada? Good grief Dewster…. you give me a headache.

      • Libby says:

        “… except for Iraq and we rebuilt it better than before, …”

        Have you lost your freakin’ mind? I really do not believe that very many residents of Mosul would agree with you. Now, the Kurds are a hair’s breadth from partitioning themselves … they might.

        And the number of terrorists in the country has gone from 6600 in 2006 to 24oo in 2015 …


        I don’t think you are going to find anybody with brains that work to say this constitutes “better than before”.

        Geez, Louise. You do worry me.

  7. J. Soden says:

    Interesting poll . . .

    Although 15% may be too high. More like 1.5%. May have forgotten a decimal point.

  8. Libby says:

    “It does not effect Green Card holders.”

    Well, actually, this is a little more how it went, per The Atlantic:

    “On Saturday this included individuals who are permanent residents of the U.S. (green-card holders) who were traveling overseas to visit family or for work—though a senior administration official said their applications would be considered on a case-by-case basis. The official also said green-card holders from those countries who are in the U.S. will have to meet with a consular officer before leaving the U.S.

    “News reports suggested the White House overruled the Department of Homeland Security’s recommendations on excluding green-card holders from the executive orders. Preibus, on Meet the Press, denied that, then appeared to suggest that the order won’t affect permanent residents going forward, but when pressed appeared to contradict himself.

    “We didn’t overrule the Department of Homeland Security, as far as green-card holders moving forward, it doesn’t affect them,” he said. But when pressed by Chuck Todd, the show’s host, on whether the order affected green-card holders, he replied: “Well, of course it does. If you’re traveling back and forth, you’re going to be subjected to further screening.”

    “On Sunday evening, John Kelly, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, offered more definitive guidance. “In applying the provisions of the president’s executive order, I hereby deem the entry of lawful permanent residents to be in the national interest,” he said in a statement. “Accordingly, absent the receipt of significant derogatory information indicating a serious threat to public safety and welfare, lawful permanent resident status will be a dispositive factor in our case-by-case determinations.”

    … that is, they are making it up as they go along.

    “The order also targets individuals of those countries who hold dual citizenship with another country. For instance, an individual who holds both Iraqi and Canadian citizenships—though the U.K. foreign secretary said the U.S. had assured him it didn’t apply to U.K. nationals.”

    … that is, they don’t know their ass from their elbow, and are causing no end of trouble, and expense. Who’s gonna do all this interviewing of returning Green Card holders? The deficit balloons as we speak.

    • Bryan H. says:

      What blows my mind is that even after seeing this incompetent roll-out, defenders of the EO still insist that the Trump administration is going to “improve our vetting system.”

      How? Trump has put forth no actual plan to do so. This is blind faith, put in an administration that’s already suffered a self-inflicted humiliating failure in its first week. A failure that could have been avoided if any actual adults who knew what they were doing were consulted. These are the people you trust to improve our vetting system?


      Here’s how it’s going to go: there won’t be any improvements made, because there isn’t any intention to do so. Trump will say that there’s no way we can fully vet the refugees or others from these countries, and the “temporary” ban will become a permanent one. I would bet money on it.

  9. Post Scripts says:

    Bet me $5 then.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.