Obama Restricted The Immigration Of Certain People Into The U.S. 19 TIMES

a reply to: neo96

All Trump has to do is use this EO and replace Libya with the rest of the seven countries.

Yes, he could withdraw his EO. But yes, the specific criteria rather than an overall ban on visa holders and refugees is quite different from what he did.

Not to mention that there is no special dispensation prescribed for "religious minorities."

a reply to: marg6043

right, we can quote anything we want here. whats happened, happened. the people in power or in opposition to the EO or for the EO have a lot more access than the average 'every-problem-solver' online.
if quoting things or making references to what other presidents did in the past would stand up in the court of law, then the EO would not be up in the air right now. otherwise they'd just have wikipedia in their bookmarks to use when they need to make arguments.

this is only valid in online forums back and forth where more quotes means you're 'more right'...

we'll have to wait and see. no news article, or blog post, or youtube video can turn any tides.

a reply to: Phage

Religious persecution is one of core grounds for granting a political asylum is it not?

From the EO:

(b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.

a reply to: D8Tee

Religious persecution is one of core grounds for granting a political asylum is it not?

Is it? Can you cite a law which specifies that? Making it a priority over other concerns?

to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution,

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee

Religious persecution is one of core grounds for granting a political asylum is it not?

Is it? Can you cite a law which specifies that? Making it a priority over other concerns?

to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution,

You have purposely left out part of the sentence to suit your agenda.
We both know religious persecution is grounds for claiming refugee status.
Prioritizing it to the extent permitted by law is something they will look at.
How can there be anything wrong with doing something within the confines of the law?
The EO states

to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution,

a reply to: D8Tee

Prioritizing it to the extent permitted by law is something they will look at.

Maybe that should have been looked at before issuing the EO.

Or changed the law first.

Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.

A prioritization based on religious grounds. Which only applies to "minority religions." Interesting.

a reply to: Phage

A prioritization based on religious grounds. Which only applies to "minority religions." Interesting.

September 9, 2016

The United States has accepted 10,801 Syrian refugees, of whom 56 are Christian. Not 56 percent; 56 total, out of 10,801. That is to say, one half of one percent. The BBC says that ten percent of all Syrians are Christian, which would mean 2.2 million Christians. It is quite obvious, and President Obama and Secretary Kerry have acknowledged it, that Middle Eastern Christians are an especially persecuted group.

Kind of makes you wonder about Obama’s real religion, doesn’t it?

a reply to: D8Tee

Kind of makes you wonder about Obama’s real religion, doesn’t it?

Are you kidding?



You know that Assad protects Christians, right? You think that might skew the numbers of those who apply for refugee status a bit?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee

Kind of makes you wonder about Obama’s real religion, doesn’t it?

Are you kidding?

You know that Assad protects Christians, right? You think that might skew the numbers of those who apply for refugee status a bit?

So Assad is a "good guy?" Perhaps... but.... As a frame of reference... Assad is the guy that Obama issued the "don't cross this line OR ELSE" challenge to... which was promptly ignored and the line was crossed....

I'd settle for you responding to my last reply to you within this thread.

(Don't worry, I won't hold my breath).

a reply to: eluryh22

So Assad is a "good guy?"

Don't worry, I won't accuse you of putting words in my mouth.

(Don't worry, I won't hold my breath).

Good. I don't think I have a responsibility to review every post in every thread that I post in. Do you?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee

Kind of makes you wonder about Obama’s real religion, doesn’t it?

Are you kidding?



You know that Assad protects Christians, right?

aye, explains why Obama wanted him out.

a reply to: D8Tee

Yeah. That's the reason.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: eluryh22

So Assad is a "good guy?"

(Don't worry, I won't hold my breath).

Good. I don't think I have a responsibility to review every post in every thread that I post in. Do you?

You do NOT have a responsibility to review every response to your accusations. However, if you would like to be taken seriously, you may want to consider how you appear when you duck and dodge those who oppose you.

Just a piece of friendly advice. It's hard to consider someone a worthy adversary when they run from conflict.

I can't help but notice you responded to this latest post... but not the previous one.

a reply to: eluryh22

It's hard to consider someone a worthy adversary when they run from conflict.

Oh. That hurts.
Really. I'm wounded.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: eluryh22

It's hard to consider someone a worthy adversary when they run from conflict.

Oh. That hurts.
Really. I'm wounded.

You may or may not be.

You still haven't responded to our last "legitimate" volley.
"Legitimate meaning: About the issue"

Not sure what else to tell you.

Jesus H, you are acting like we DON'T have actionable intelligence to go on. How many Islamic attacks have happened in the last three years? How many more do you want happening here?

If the intelligence community thinks these countries are the most likely to be ports of leave, what is the problem?

Do you wanna try to stop this or not?

a reply to: Phage

Maybe that should have been looked at before issuing the EO.

Bannon likely wrote the first draft of the EO.
After they had to edit out 'destroy Islam' 50 times, they were tired and overlooked some details before issuing the revised EO.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: carewemust

I tell you what, if any will be jihadist enter the country now, we should go and hang by the conjones the judges that are behind the restrain on the ban.

They should be hold accountable for any deaths as a result of them playing politics with the legislative branch.

Why? If a future terrorist enters from a country not listed in the EO do you want Trump hung? Don't bang on about Obama didn't list for example Saudi Arabia, it's not Obama that wants a blanket ban on people without any justification, even if they already hold a valid visa - Trump has. Get over it.

a reply to: marg6043

Incorrect. His motives could be used to prove (even more) that his executive order violated the establishment clause by giving preference to a certain religious group (Christians). At any rate, the courts have decided.

a reply to: Phage

Yes, it does because when you look at persecuted groups in a country, it is generally not the majority that is persecuting itself.

So it stands to reason that a persecuted group is a minority and, like it or not, religion is one of the common reasons why a group will be persecuted across the world.

So ... when you have a muslim majority country, the religious minorities will be religions other than Islam. I know that makes heads explode, but there it is, and yes, Muslims can be very intolerant of minority groups that do not synch with their religious beliefs.

Just ask any other religion, gays, atheists, etc., who live in Muslim majority countries.