What is the logic of the travel ban?

[Weatherman2020]

I thought the ban was put forth so they could try and figure out a way to actually vet these people. IMO, it makes complete sense.

They are already being vetted and if there is a problem in the system in THIS country, it is with how the FBI and Homeland Security's hands are tied when they do encounter a possible terrorist. Look at the last few terrorist attacks; all of them had contact/investigation by the FBI/Homeland and were deemed not enough evidence to continue monitoring. The last one even got his gun back. THAT is where we seem to have an issue right now, not who is being let into the country from a war WE started.

Wait, so you admit we have a problem and your answer is to just keep letting more in? Are you suicidal?

Like their comrades the Muslims, the left consider America the Great Satan and love to see terrorist attacks on Americans.

 

[OldLady]

I thought the ban was put forth so they could try and figure out a way to actually vet these people. IMO, it makes complete sense.

They are already being vetted and if there is a problem in the system in THIS country, it is with how the FBI and Homeland Security's hands are tied when they do encounter a possible terrorist. Look at the last few terrorist attacks; all of them had contact/investigation by the FBI/Homeland and were deemed not enough evidence to continue monitoring. The last one even got his gun back. THAT is where we seem to have an issue right now, not who is being let into the country from a war WE started.

On behalf of the current system we have : The people that do it says it doesn't work.
So, you think the problem is constitutional rights? Wow, OK.

I triggered you with that gun example, didn't I?
Steady.....

 

[miketx]

Quite simply there is only policymaking illogic underpinning the ban. The only thing that logically warrants Trump's following through with his ban is that he said he'd do it; thus it's a logical thing to do to appease his supporters. Outside of that, there is nothing rational about the design and execution of Trump's travel ban, except perhaps that it's structured so as to have no impact on Trump's own business exploits.

From the Cato Institute

Chance of Dying in an Attack by a Foreign-Born Terrorist, 1975-2015

U.S. Murder Rates, Excluding Foreign-Born Terrorism

All Terrorists, by Visa Category, 1975-2015

Note: *1981 onward


Deadliness of All Terrorists, by Visa Category, 1975-2015

Deadliness of All Terrorists, by Visa Category, Excluding 9/11, 1975-2015

Foreign-Born Terrorists and Murders in Pre- and Post-9/11 United States

Identified Foreign Persons Who Attempted or Committed Terrorism on U.S. Soil, 1975-2015

Notes:

• A=asylee, F=student on F or M visa, I=illegal, K=K-1 fiancé(e), L=lawful permanent resident, R=refugee, T=tourist on B-visa, U=unknown, V=visa waiver program.
• * If multiple attackers, all casualties spread evenly across all attackers.

Observations:

• ZERO -->The number of Americans killed on US soil from 1975 to 2015 by citizens of the affected by Trump's travel ban.
• ZERO --> Number of the Muslim majority countries that have a Trump hotel, building or office that are on the list.
• 1 in 3.6M per year --> Chance of an American being killed by a foreigner attacking on U.S. soil, 1975-2015.
• 1 in 3.64B per year --> Chance of an American being killed by a refugee attacking on U.S. soil, 1975 - 2015.
• 162 --> The number of Americans killed by citizens of Egypt, 1975 - 2015.
• 314 --> The number of Americans killed by citizens of the UAE, 1975 - 2015.
• 2,369 --> The number of Americans killed by citizens of Saudi Arabia, 1975 - 2015.

What about illegal immigrants?

Only 10 illegal immigrants became terrorists, a minuscule 0.000038 percent of the 26.5 million who entered from 1975 through 2015. In other words, 2.65 million illegal immigrants entered the United States for each one who ended up being a terrorist.

Only one of those illegal immigrants, Ahmed Ajaj, actually succeeded in killing an American as he was one of the 1993 World Trade Center conspirators. The human cost of terrorism caused by illegal immigrants was thus $15,000,000 or equal to $0.57 cents per illegal immigrant. As a reminder, none of the 9/11 hijackers entered the United States illegally.
​

Additional Recommended Reading and Reference Materials/Tools:

• TERRORISM SINCE 9/11 The American Cases
  
• RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents
  • Search the database here
• Requiring a Nexus to National Security: Immigration, ‘Terrorist Activities,’ and Statutory Reform
  
• The Strategic National Risk Assessment in Support of PPD 8: A Comprehensive Risk-Based Approach toward a Secure and Resilient Nation
  
• The Quantitative Analysis of Terrorism and Immigration
  
• National Security Division Statistics on Unsealed International Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Convictions 9/11/01-3/18/10

My, what a pretty but useless post. hows that media diet taste?

 

[whitehall]

If it's "only policymaking illogic" why is the left so hysterical about it?

 

[Avatar4321]

There is no travel ban. Nothing prevents citizens or legal residents from traveling

 

[TNHarley]

I thought the ban was put forth so they could try and figure out a way to actually vet these people. IMO, it makes complete sense.

They are already being vetted and if there is a problem in the system in THIS country, it is with how the FBI and Homeland Security's hands are tied when they do encounter a possible terrorist. Look at the last few terrorist attacks; all of them had contact/investigation by the FBI/Homeland and were deemed not enough evidence to continue monitoring. The last one even got his gun back. THAT is where we seem to have an issue right now, not who is being let into the country from a war WE started.

On behalf of the current system we have : The people that do it says it doesn't work.
So, you think the problem is constitutional rights? Wow, OK.

I triggered you with that gun example, didn't I?
Steady.....

no, you triggered me with blaming our freedoms for terrorism.

 

[miketx]

^ Well the lying media fucktards says there is so it must be true, right?

 

[Avatar4321]

If it's "only policymaking illogic" why is the left so hysterical about it?

Because they are lying about it to stir up a mob

 

[Care4all]

It's all a song and a dance....political posturing frosting.

It extends the 2 year process to get a visa to come here, to 2 years and 4 months.....

WOW!

Whoop dee do! That made us safer than we already were by leaps and bounds, right?


NOT!

It hurt us, it hurt us in Iraq where we work with natives to defeat terrorists, and rely on interpreters, and on the World stage.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Quite simply there is only policymaking illogic underpinning the ban. The only thing that logically warrants Trump's following through with his ban is that he said he'd do it; thus it's a logical thing to do to appease his supporters. Outside of that, there is nothing rational about the design and execution of Trump's travel ban, except perhaps that it's structured so as to have no impact on Trump's own business exploits.

From the Cato Institute

Chance of Dying in an Attack by a Foreign-Born Terrorist, 1975-2015

U.S. Murder Rates, Excluding Foreign-Born Terrorism

All Terrorists, by Visa Category, 1975-2015

Note: *1981 onward


Deadliness of All Terrorists, by Visa Category, 1975-2015

Deadliness of All Terrorists, by Visa Category, Excluding 9/11, 1975-2015

Foreign-Born Terrorists and Murders in Pre- and Post-9/11 United States

Identified Foreign Persons Who Attempted or Committed Terrorism on U.S. Soil, 1975-2015

Notes:

• A=asylee, F=student on F or M visa, I=illegal, K=K-1 fiancé(e), L=lawful permanent resident, R=refugee, T=tourist on B-visa, U=unknown, V=visa waiver program.
• * If multiple attackers, all casualties spread evenly across all attackers.

Observations:

• ZERO -->The number of Americans killed on US soil from 1975 to 2015 by citizens of the affected by Trump's travel ban.
• ZERO --> Number of the Muslim majority countries that have a Trump hotel, building or office that are on the list.
• 1 in 3.6M per year --> Chance of an American being killed by a foreigner attacking on U.S. soil, 1975-2015.
• 1 in 3.64B per year --> Chance of an American being killed by a refugee attacking on U.S. soil, 1975 - 2015.
• 162 --> The number of Americans killed by citizens of Egypt, 1975 - 2015.
• 314 --> The number of Americans killed by citizens of the UAE, 1975 - 2015.
• 2,369 --> The number of Americans killed by citizens of Saudi Arabia, 1975 - 2015.

What about illegal immigrants?

Only 10 illegal immigrants became terrorists, a minuscule 0.000038 percent of the 26.5 million who entered from 1975 through 2015. In other words, 2.65 million illegal immigrants entered the United States for each one who ended up being a terrorist.

Only one of those illegal immigrants, Ahmed Ajaj, actually succeeded in killing an American as he was one of the 1993 World Trade Center conspirators. The human cost of terrorism caused by illegal immigrants was thus $15,000,000 or equal to $0.57 cents per illegal immigrant. As a reminder, none of the 9/11 hijackers entered the United States illegally.
​

Additional Recommended Reading and Reference Materials/Tools:

• TERRORISM SINCE 9/11 The American Cases
  
• RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents
  • Search the database here
• Requiring a Nexus to National Security: Immigration, ‘Terrorist Activities,’ and Statutory Reform
  
• The Strategic National Risk Assessment in Support of PPD 8: A Comprehensive Risk-Based Approach toward a Secure and Resilient Nation
  
• The Quantitative Analysis of Terrorism and Immigration
  
• National Security Division Statistics on Unsealed International Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Convictions 9/11/01-3/18/10

p.s. there's an error in the map you post here Xelor. The country named Syria in the map is not Syria is Turkey

TY.

 

[federalist50]

It was my hope that the Trump administration would LOOK at the vetting procedures and policies in place BEFORE instituting any type of ban. LOOK at the actual areas where terrorists in this country have come from. I don't agree with the ban, but if there had to be one, it could have been done with a lot more thought and sense. It probably wouldn't have been done if the Trump administration had learned the facts.

I can't help but wonder how the families who lost loved ones in the Boston marathon, San Bernardnino, Orlando shootings, etc. etc. think about this ban?

 

[usmbguest5318]

If it's "only policymaking illogic" why is the left so hysterical about it?

Wise people on the left and right are annoyed because the policy made:

• contributes to the diminishment of the U.S. as a trusted world leader
• cannot be shown to be rationally sound and likely to have any useful outcome beyond appeasing the nitwits who actively support Trump
• will cost Americans ~$18B, and to no end.

Were Trump's ban in place on 9/11, it would have changed nothing. The WTC would have fallen, the Pentagon hit and the plane downed in PA. And we'd have known then as we do now that no national from the banned countries had a damn thing to do with it.

 

[usmbguest5318]

My, what a pretty but useless post. hows that media diet taste?

The report from which the OP's content is taken is not a media produced or backed document. The report to which I linked at the start of the post is the result of original research and analysis conducted by a diehard conservative and conservative organization.

 

[Winston]

And why do people scream about ti being unconstitutional? Can someone elaborate on that?

The fifth amendment's due process clause is violated. And don't even attempt the argument that the fifth amendment does not apply. It starts out with no PERSON. Which clearly shows that the Trump administration is totally out of their element, they don't even have a fundamental understanding of the Constitution.

 

[OldLady]

It was my hope that the Trump administration would LOOK at the vetting procedures and policies in place BEFORE instituting any type of ban. LOOK at the actual areas where terrorists in this country have come from. I don't agree with the ban, but if there had to be one, it could have been done with a lot more thought and sense. It probably wouldn't have been done if the Trump administration had learned the facts.

I can't help but wonder how the families who lost loved ones in the Boston marathon, San Bernardnino, Orlando shootings, etc. etc. think about this ban?

Since it wouldn't have kept those terrorists out, I wonder, too. Terrorism needs serious addressing, but I think the OP's point is that it won't actually address the problems that need to be addressed. I also think the repercussions will cause hard feelings among the Muslim community, making it even harder to get them to open up to authorities when they suspect a neighbor or friend has become radicalized.

 

[miketx]

And why do people scream about ti being unconstitutional? Can someone elaborate on that?

The fifth amendment's due process clause is violated. And don't even attempt the argument that the fifth amendment does not apply. It starts out with no PERSON. Which clearly shows that the Trump administration is totally out of their element, they don't even have a fundamental understanding of the Constitution.

That does not apply to foreign nationals who may be enemy agents. The people who don't understand are you libs. But what it really amounts too is that YOU WANT terrorists here killing people. Plus, if you knew jack shit about the BoR's, you would know that due process applies only to people charged with a crime.

 

[miketx]

It was my hope that the Trump administration would LOOK at the vetting procedures and policies in place BEFORE instituting any type of ban. LOOK at the actual areas where terrorists in this country have come from. I don't agree with the ban, but if there had to be one, it could have been done with a lot more thought and sense. It probably wouldn't have been done if the Trump administration had learned the facts.

I can't help but wonder how the families who lost loved ones in the Boston marathon, San Bernardnino, Orlando shootings, etc. etc. think about this ban?

Since it wouldn't have kept those terrorists out, I wonder, too. Terrorism needs serious addressing, but I think the OP's point is that it won't actually address the problems that need to be addressed. I also think the repercussions will cause hard feelings among the Muslim community, making it even harder to get them to open up to authorities when they suspect a neighbor or friend has become radicalized.

So what is your answer?

 

[OldLady]

It was my hope that the Trump administration would LOOK at the vetting procedures and policies in place BEFORE instituting any type of ban. LOOK at the actual areas where terrorists in this country have come from. I don't agree with the ban, but if there had to be one, it could have been done with a lot more thought and sense. It probably wouldn't have been done if the Trump administration had learned the facts.

I can't help but wonder how the families who lost loved ones in the Boston marathon, San Bernardnino, Orlando shootings, etc. etc. think about this ban?

Since it wouldn't have kept those terrorists out, I wonder, too. Terrorism needs serious addressing, but I think the OP's point is that it won't actually address the problems that need to be addressed. I also think the repercussions will cause hard feelings among the Muslim community, making it even harder to get them to open up to authorities when they suspect a neighbor or friend has become radicalized.

So what is your answer?

Do I LOOK like a National Security Adviser? Homeland Security agent? FBI? Those are the people Trump's administration should be looking to for answers, as well as the Muslim community. They are doing the work (or trying to). They probably know what would make it work better.

 

[miketx]

It was my hope that the Trump administration would LOOK at the vetting procedures and policies in place BEFORE instituting any type of ban. LOOK at the actual areas where terrorists in this country have come from. I don't agree with the ban, but if there had to be one, it could have been done with a lot more thought and sense. It probably wouldn't have been done if the Trump administration had learned the facts.

I can't help but wonder how the families who lost loved ones in the Boston marathon, San Bernardnino, Orlando shootings, etc. etc. think about this ban?

Since it wouldn't have kept those terrorists out, I wonder, too. Terrorism needs serious addressing, but I think the OP's point is that it won't actually address the problems that need to be addressed. I also think the repercussions will cause hard feelings among the Muslim community, making it even harder to get them to open up to authorities when they suspect a neighbor or friend has become radicalized.

So what is your answer?

Do I LOOK like a National Security Adviser? Homeland Security agent? FBI? Those are the people Trump's administration should be looking to for answers, as well as the Muslim community. They are doing the work (or trying to). They probably know what would make it work better.

Then WTF are you running your mouth about it for?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

If it's "only policymaking illogic" why is the left so hysterical about it?

Wise people on the left and right are annoyed because the policy made:

• contributes to the diminishment of the U.S. as a trusted world leader
• cannot be shown to be rationally sound and likely to have any useful outcome beyond appeasing the nitwits who actively support Trump
• will cost Americans ~$18B, and to no end.

Were Trump's ban in place on 9/11, it would have changed nothing. The WTC would have fallen, the Pentagon hit and the plane downed in PA. And we'd have known then as we do now that no national from the banned countries had a damn thing to do with it.

agree, the ban should be all-inclusive of states who harbor/produce terrorists.....