The History Book Club discussion

157 views

Comments Showing 1-50 of 85 (85 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 30, 2017 03:42PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
My apologies to our global members about the recent travel ban - thank goodness it has for now only a 90 day shelf life. I believe 120 days for refugees. Updated: However for Syrian Refugees - this order is indefinite.

I will place on this thread information about what is going on and I do hope that none of you have been caught up in this.

We will also on this thread discuss books that have been published that deal with the immigration issues and matters and/or with the problems of refugees, immigrants and the human suffering associated with this situation.

This is the executive order that Trump signed:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-r...


message 2: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 28, 2017 06:29PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
What Immigrants need to know about Trump's order?

Source: CNN

This article is by Saeed Ahmed from CNN.

(CNN)There's a lot of confusion about US President Donald Trump's executive order limiting immigration, especially for immigrants already living in the United States and those wanting to travel here. Here are some things you need to know:

How do I know if it affects me?

For now, President Trump's executive order affects citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries.
They are:
-- Iraq
-- Iran
-- Libya
-- Somalia
-- Sudan
-- Syria
-- Yemen
But the executive order also makes clear those seven countries are just a starting point for a likely broader ban that might include more countries.

What can I do to protect myself?

If you're a citizen of any of the countries listed above, do not travel outside the US at least for the next 90 days. This applies even if you have a green card, which means you're a lawful permanent resident of the US.

What if I have an emergency and I have to travel?

If you absolutely HAVE to travel, please consult an immigration lawyer first.

What if I am already abroad and need to travel back to the US?

If you're a citizen of any of the countries listed above, you may have difficulty getting back into the US.

If you're a lawful permanent resident of the US from any of the countries above, get in touch with an immigration lawyer before flying back.

What if I'm a naturalized US citizen?

If you're an American citizen, you should be fine -- even if you are from one of the targeted countries.

Can my relatives fly back with me if I'm a citizen?

Not if you're from one of the countries listed above. In that case, your relatives may face difficulties at immigration upon entering the US.

What if I have family or friends who were waiting to resettle to the US as refugees?

The executive order also halted the refugee program, at least for the next 120 days.

This applies to all refugees, not just those from the seven countries above.

In the case of Syria, the resettlement process has been halted indefinitely.

What else do I need to know?

Know your rights. The Immigration Defense Project has prepared a flyer that outlines how to lawfully interact with Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents if they come to your house.

You can find the flyer here.

http://www.immdefense.org/wp-content/...

Note from the HBC: We are sorry that this has happened and we do not support this ban - but it is what it is right now. The agencies and the State Department and other think tanks and institutions of higher learning as well as Congress should all have been consulted to ensure that this did not happen without some warning to travelers and/or unfold the way that this did or at all. Many, many do not understand what criteria or statistics were used to come up with this ban. The United States is a country of laws and this 90 day ban - at the very least at this point in time - does not have a long shelf life. Hopefully - justice, kindness and sensitivity as well as intelligence and the rule of law will prevail.


message 3: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 04:14PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Trump’s Immigration Ban Draws Deep Anger and Muted Praise
By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑAJAN. 28, 2017


A protest in New York City on Friday against President Trump’s immigration policies, which now include a ban on refugees. Credit Spencer Platt/Getty Images

A group of Nobel Prize winners said it would damage American leadership in higher education and research. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan and some relatives of Americans killed in terrorist attacks said it was right on target. An evangelical Christian group called it an affront to human dignity.

The reaction on Saturday to President Trump’s ban on refugees entering the United States, with particular focus on certain Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa, was swift, certain — and sharply divided.

The order drew sharp and widespread condemnation Saturday from Democrats, religious groups, business leaders, academics and others, who called it inhumane, discriminatory and akin to taking a “wrecking ball to the Statue of Liberty.” Thousands of professors, including several Nobel laureates, signed a statement calling it a “major step towards implementing the stringent racial and religious profiling promised on the campaign trail.”

Protesters gathered at airports to demand the release of people who were being held on arrival while immigration officials tried to determine whether they were barred by the executive order.

Remainder of article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/us...

Source: The New York Times


message 4: by Peter (new)

Peter Flom Trump's order is terrible.

Would this thread also be good for other things about immigration? Books, stories .... etc.?


message 5: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Yes it is for all of those things.


message 6: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Human Cargo: A Journey Among Refugees

Human Cargo A Journey Among Refugees by Caroline Moorehead by Caroline Moorehead Caroline Moorehead

Synopsis:

Traveling for nearly two years and across four continents, Caroline Moorehead takes readers on a journey to understand why millions of people are forced to abandon their homes, possessions, and families in order to find a place where they may, quite literally, be allowed to live.

Moorehead's experience living and working with refugees puts a human face on the news, providing unforgettable portraits of the refugees she meets in Cairo, Guinea, Sicily, Lebanon, England, Australia, Finland, and at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Human Cargo changes our understanding of what it means to have and lose a place in the world, and reveals how the refugee "problem" is on a par with global crises such as terrorism and world hunger.

Awards and Honors:

National Book Critics Circle Award Finalist


message 7: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Aleppo: The Rise and Fall of Syria's Great Merchant City

Aleppo The Rise and Fall of Syria's Great Merchant City by Philip Mansel by Philip Mansel Philip Mansel

Synopsis:

Today, Aleppo lies in ruins.

Its streets are plunged in darkness; most of its population has fled. Google Earth shows no lights at night. But Aleppo was once a vibrant world city, a trade and cultural hub at the end of the Silk Road, famous for its food and music, and a place where Muslims, Christians, Jews, and visitors from around the world lived and traded together in peace.

In this heartbreaking and powerful history of one of the world’s oldest, continuously-inhabited cities, author Philip Mansel chronicles the many lives of Aleppo, successively ruled by the Assyrian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Arab, Ottoman, and French empires.

In Part I of the book, Mansel details the city’s lives over the centuries, including her rise under the Ottomans, when Aleppo became that empire's third largest city, after Constantinople and Cairo. In Part II, Mansel has assembled 15 historical accounts of Aleppo, many of them never published before, ranging from the early 1600s to 1920.

Written by British and French merchants, consuls, and archeologists, these accounts chronicle more than four centuries of life in the city, with each entry filled with details noting the physical beauty of the place – her orchards and terraced gardens, her country houses and famous walls, her ancient Roman dwellings still used by the locals, her places of worship, and more.

Included in the accounts are Alexander Russell’s famed natural history from 1756, and a reproduction of Baedeker’s map from 1912, at the height of the city’s Ottoman period and before World War I would change the region forever.

With more than 250 notes and an extensive bibliography of related titles published in both English and French, Aleppo: The Rise and Fall of Syria’s Great Merchant City is a remarkable piece of scholarship, but also a tragic reminder that even in the 21st Century, humanity can witness the loss of a great city, a traditional pinnacle of cultural and economic power, and a place of beauty.


message 8: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 01:14PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
At JFK:- in New York City only at this time

Federal court halts Trump’s immigration ban
Step one in a long fight to come



Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images

The federal court for the Eastern District of New York issued an emergency stay halting President Donald Trump’s executive order banning entry to the US from seven majority-Muslim countries tonight, following widespread protests at airports around the country.

The stay prevents the government from sending immigrants back to their home countries because it would cause them “irreparable harm,” but it is unclear if they will have to remain in detention until a substantive ruling on the constitutionality of the ban is delivered.

“If someone is not being released, I guess I’ll just hear from you,” Judge Ann Donnelly told the plaintiff’s lawyers, according to the New York Times.

People affected by the order with valid greencards and visas who were not in transit at the time are still likely stuck abroad, but there’s now at least a time frame for a further ruling on the ban.

Remainder of article:

http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/28/144...

Source: The Verge

Since it was in a federal court - this might pertain to all detainees at airports right now who arrived at US airports today

I do hope so. But there are many who have green cards who are not able to come back at this point in time. Update: Priebus on Sunday Talk shows said that this is being walked back

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/nati...


message 9: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 28, 2017 07:32PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
NEW YORK (AP) - The Latest on U.S. President Donald Trump and his ban on refugees from Muslim-majority countries (all times local): - January 28th, 2017

9:40 p.m.

A federal judge in New York has issued an emergency order temporarily barring the U.S. from deporting people from nations subject to President Donald Trump's travel ban.

U.S. District Judge Ann Donnelly issued the order Saturday evening after lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union filed a court petition on behalf of people from seven predominantly Muslim nations who were detained at airports across the country as the ban took effect.

Cheers broke out in a crowd of demonstrators outside a Brooklyn courthouse as the decision, effective nationwide, was announced.

The order barred U.S. border agents from removing anyone who arrived in the U.S. with a valid visa from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.

It also covered anyone with an approved refugee application.

It was unclear how quickly the order might affect people in detention.

Note: It is my understanding that this only affects those folks in detention nationwide.


message 10: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Seeking Refuge: On the Shores of the Global Refugee Crisis

Seeking Refuge On the Shores of the Global Refugee Crisis by Stephan Bauman by Stephan Bauman

Synopsis:

Recipient of Christianity Today's Award of Merit in Politics and Public Life, 2016

What will rule our hearts: fear or compassion?

We can’t ignore the refugee crisis—arguably the greatest geo-political issue of our time—but how do we even begin to respond to something so massive and complex?

In Seeking Refuge, three experts from World Relief, a global organization serving refugees, offer a practical, well-rounded, well-researched guide to the issue.

* Who are refugees and other displaced peoples?
* What are the real risks and benefits of receiving them?
* How do we balance compassion and security?

Drawing from history, public policy, psychology, many personal stories, and their own unique Christian worldview, the authors offer a nuanced and compelling portrayal of the plight of refugees and the extraordinary opportunity we have to love our neighbors as ourselves.


message 11: by Peter (new)

Peter Flom Some thoughts on this.

I am opposed to terrorism. All sane humans are opposed to terrorism. I was in 2 WTC when the planes hit. I am opposed to terrorism.

But this ban, pretending to be an effort against terrorism, is nothing of the kind. And it repels me.

My father's parents and my mother's grandparents, fled Russia because it was not a good place to be Jewish. They came to America. They weren't warmly welcomed, but they were allowed to stay. They were not ideal immigrants. They were poor. They were unschooled. They did not speak English. They did not have marketable skills. But they were allowed in. And they prospered mightily. And they were part of a giant wave of immigrants, many of whom prospered mightily in this, the land where the streets were paved with gold. And America prospered with them.

A generation later, more refugees were fleeing. They were fleeing Germany, where it was emphatically not a good place to be Jewish. They were turned away. And they died.

Today, Jan 28, 2017, Donald Trump chose that second path.

So, today, Jan 28, 2017, I, an atheist raised as a Jew, am a Muslim. As are we all.


message 12: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 11:05PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Peter - I am with you on being vehemently opposed to terrorism and I personally was devastated by 9/11 - we also lost a young neighbor.

I am glad that you were able to be safe - those memories must be with you to this present day. You are very fortunate.

Yes, you are correct - different presidents and administrations did different things. I am glad that your parents and grandparents were able to come to America. It is such a stain that FDR did not allow the refugees fleeing Germany in - when some of them could have been saved. And here we are with Trump choosing the second path but in a more perverse way - in my opinion.

Folks who already have green cards - why are they on the list? Or ones who already have been given visas by the government.

I can understand creating more stringent entry requirements if the vetting has some holes in it. Plug those holes but this executive order was an order created in a vacuum with little if any input from knowledgable agencies within the government - including the state department or the CIA or Congress - it has been reported that this executive order was written by Steve Bannon - who has not even been approved by Congress. That does not excuse this president who signed it but it makes the strategy and the rationale suspect.

This strategy is flawed - in the opinion of many knowledgeable people - it has been reported that the department of homeland security was not even consulted before the executive order was signed nor was Kelly or other intelligence personnel - none of the terrorists in the US were even from these countries - maybe if Saudi Arabia, UAE, Pakistan, Egypt or Turkey were on the list - then maybe one could understand the strategy or thought process that was used - however none of the countries where terrorists have actually come from are on the list. And the president nor any agency has explained what the rationale was or why these specific countries and not others where foreign terrorists have actually come from are not included. This just appears to be a shoot from the hip order which carelessly and without any sensitivity hurts everyone.

Honestly, the Brooklyn Federal judge got this right last night and I do hope that the detainees are all released. All of us felt so bad for all of them - ones who had already been so loyal to the US. It has been reported that not all detainees have been released. The mayor of New York stated on television this morning that it has been difficult for anyone to get any idea of who is still being detained or why given the federal order last night.

What disturbs me even more is how this executive order was hatched and who were the hatchers - in isolation - and that it appears to violate our constitution. In addition to the fact that this is not what America is all about or ever has been. This will ultimately I feel have to be resolved in the courts as last night's fiasco was in part. It is going to be a long four years I am afraid. This has been one heck of a week with a lot of fear mongering going on that is most unfortunate and unfair.

See what the Cato Institute has to say about all of this:
https://www.cato.org

Other News:
https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-01-2...
http://patch.com/new-york/new-york-ci...
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politic...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slates...
http://abc13.com/news/a-look-at-stori...
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/...
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-de...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slates...

This needs to be solved:
http://www.thenational.ae/world/ameri...

Fareed Zaharia - GPS: (interesting statistics)
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2017/01/...

Story of the St. Louis during FDR's presidency
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politic...


message 13: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 04:19PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
The Morning They Came for Us: Dispatches from Syria

The Morning They Came for Us Dispatches from Syria by Janine Di Giovanni by Janine Di Giovanni Janine Di Giovanni

Synopsis:

In May of 2012, Janine di Giovanni travelled to Syria. It would mark the beginning of a long relationship with the country, starting with her coverage of the peaceful uprising and continuing as the situation quickly turned into one of the most brutal, internecine conflicts in recent history. Drawn to the stories of the ordinary people caught up in the conflict, Syria came to consume her every moment, her every emotion.

Speaking to those directly involved in the war, di Giovanni relays here the personal stories of rebel fighters thrown in jail at the least provocation; of children and families forced to watch loved ones taken and killed by regime forces with dubious justifications; and the stories of the elite, holding pool parties in Damascus hotels, trying to deny the human consequences of the nearby shelling.

Delivered with passion, fearlessness and sensitivity, The Morning They Came For Us is an unflinching account of a nation on the brink of disintegration, charting an apocalyptic but at times tender story of life in a jihadist war – and an unforgettable testament to human resilience in the face of devastating, unimaginable horrors.


message 14: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 11:31AM) (new)


message 15: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 11:30AM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Senator Lindsey Graham:

McCain, Graham: Trump order may become 'self-inflicted wound' in terrorism fight

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbyin...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa...


message 16: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
White House Pushes Back as Judges Halt Parts of Refugee Plan
by Justin Sink and Ben Brody
January 29, 2017, 8:53 AM EST January 29, 2017, 2:02 PM EST


The White House defended President Donald Trump’s executive order halting entry to the U.S. from seven predominantly Muslim Middle East countries after judges blocked parts of the plan.

Republican lawmakers suggested the president’s action was too broad and potentially damaging to the U.S. Trump’s chief of staff said the immigration order doesn’t include holders of green cards, although those people could be subject to additional steps when they travel overseas.

A federal judge in Boston became the latest to curb Trump’s immigration order, directing customs officials at the city’s Logan International Airport on Sunday to let passengers from the seven countries with valid visas disembark and go on their way.

Trump told his almost 23 million Twitter followers on Sunday morning: “Our country needs strong borders and extreme vetting, NOW. Look what is happening all over Europe and, indeed, the world - a horrible mess!”

Remainder of article shows some walking back - it is astounding that they are saying that folks can stay when they have visas and green cards when some poor folks were put on planes back to Syria and where they had come from!

For example this statement:

The president was putting Americans first, White House spokesman Sean Spicer said on ABC’s “This Week” program. The 109 people held by immigration authorities on Saturday were simply “slowed down” in entering the U.S., he said, because “the safety of the American citizens, the safety of our country has got to be paramount.”

More Walking Back:

The judges’ moves came at the end of a day when a number of students, refugees and dual citizens were stuck overseas or detained, and some businesses, including Google, warned employees from those countries not to risk leaving the U.S. Spontaneous protests erupted at a number of airports around the nation, and world leaders including London’s mayor and Canada’s prime minister joined U.S. lawmakers in crying foul.

Although some U.S. visa and green-card holders were blocked from boarding flights to the U.S. on Saturday after the order was issued, “the executive order doesn’t affect green-card holders moving forward,” Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” in what seemed to be an adjustment to the administration’s policy.

He added that green-card holders -- legal permanent residents -- may be subject to additional screening if they travel to one of the seven countries targeted by the order. Even U.S. citizens may be affected: “I would suspect that if you’re American citizen traveling back and forth to Libya you’re likely to be subjected to further questioning when you come into an airport.,” Priebus said.


message 17: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 11:30AM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Senator Mitch McConnell:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, in his first public statement on the order, expressed opposition to “religious tests” for immigration restrictions.

“It’s hopefully going to be decided in the courts as to whether or not this has gone too far,” McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, said on the ABC program. “I don’t want to criticize them for improving vetting. I think we need to be careful. We don’t have religious tests in this country.”

Source: Bloomberg

The Cynic The Political Education of Mitch McConnell by Alec Macgillis by Alec Macgillis (no photo)


message 18: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 04:24PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Updates on interpretation and some walking things back from the original roll out of the executive order:

ONE - Bloomberg reported today that "Reice Priebus stated - Although some U.S. visa and green-card holders were blocked from boarding flights to the U.S. on Saturday after the order was issued, “the executive order doesn’t affect green-card holders moving forward,” Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” in what seemed to be an adjustment to the administration’s policy.

He added that green-card holders -- legal permanent residents -- may be subject to additional screening if they travel to one of the seven countries targeted by the order. Even U.S. citizens may be affected: “I would suspect that if you’re American citizen traveling back and forth to Libya you’re likely to be subjected to further questioning when you come into an airport.,” Priebus said."

TWO - Bloomberg reported: “Valid visas are great,” Priebus said in a separate interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “But it doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be subjected to further questioning.”

Note: Foks with visas were actually sent back or not allowed to board planes. This is a walk back thankfully from that position. However, a good question to ask is "what happened to the poor people who were sent back and not allowed to either continue on their flight or board at all'?

More: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa...


message 19: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Senator Rob Portman:

Senator Rob Portman, an Ohio Republican, said tighter screening of those entering the U.S. is needed but urged that “we just slow down” and make sure it’s properly targeted.

“It is not a ban” on Muslims, Portman said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “However, I think it was not properly vetted. So, you have an ‘extreme vetting’ proposal that didn’t get the vetting it should have had, and as the result, in the implementation, we’ve seen some problems.”

More:
http://www.portman.senate.gov/public/...


message 20: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 04:31PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Representative Nunes:

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.): "In light of attempts by jihadist groups to infiltrate fighters into refugee flows to the West, along with Europe’s tragic experience coping with this problem, the Trump Administration’s executive order on refugees is a common-sense security measure to prevent terror attacks on the homeland. While accommodations should be made for green card holders and those who’ve assisted the U.S. armed forces, this is a useful temporary measure on seven nations of concern until we can verify who is entering the United States.”

California Republican Rep. Devin Nunes, chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, praised the order as a “useful temporary measure.” "In light of attempts by jihadist groups to infiltrate fighters into refugee flows to the West, along with Europe’s tragic experience coping with this problem, the Trump Administration’s executive order on refugees is a common-sense security measure to prevent terror attacks on the homeland," Nunes said.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news...

More: https://nunes.house.gov

Restoring the Republic A Clear, Concise, and Colorful Blueprint for America's Future by Devin Nunes by Devin Nunes (no photo)


message 21: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 04:12PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Other Republicans Opposed (12)

Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.): “This is ridiculous. I guess I understand what his intention is, but unfortunately the order appears to have been rushed through without full consideration. You know, there are many, many nuances of immigration policy that can be life or death for many innocent, vulnerable people around the world.”

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.): “It’s unacceptable when even legal permanent residents are being detained or turned away at airports and ports of entry."

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.): "Like Pres. Obama's executive actions on immigration, Pres. Trump's executive order overreaches and undermines our constitutional system."

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.): The order is "too broad." "If we send a signal to the Middle East that the U.S. sees all Muslims as jihadis, the terrorist recruiters win by telling kids that America is banning Muslims and that this is America versus one religion. Our generational fight against jihadism requires wisdom.”

Rep. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.): “The president’s Executive Order [goes] beyond the increased vetting actions that Congress has supported on a bipartisan basis and inexplicably applied to Green Card holders. This should be addressed and corrected expeditiously.”

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.): "The president's policy entirely misses the mark."

Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.): “While I’ve supported heightened vetting procedures for those wanting to travel to our country, I have never, nor will I ever support a blanket travel ban for people solely based on ethnic or religious grounds.”

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine): "The worldwide refugee ban set forth in the executive order is overly broad and implementing it will be immediately problematic."

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.): “I object to the suspension of visas from the seven named countries because we could have accomplished our objective of keeping our homeland safe by immediate implementation of more thorough screening procedures."

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.): "Our first role as the federal government is to protect our national security and I believe we need to work in Congress to reform and strengthen our visa vetting process. However, I oppose President Trump's rushed and overly broad Executive Order."

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.): "While I am supportive of strengthening our screening processes and securing our borders, a blanket travel ban goes too far. I also believe that lawful residents of the United States should be permitted to enter the country. I urge the Administration to take the appropriate steps to fix this overly broad executive order.”

Rep. Will Hurd (R-Tex.): The ban is the "ultimate display of mistrust" and "will erode allies' willingness to fight with us."

Source: The Washington Post
Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...


message 22: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 07:42PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Republicans who have Reservations/decline to fully support (19)

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.): "It’s going to be decided in the courts as to whether or not this has gone too far."

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah): "I do have some technical questions about President Trump's Executive Order titled 'Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.' My staff and I will continue to reach out to the White House for clarification on these issues."

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Edward R. Royce (R-Calif.): "Pausing the intake of refugees from terror hot spots is the right call to keep America safe. I hope cases of individuals with visas traveling as this executive action went into effect — including some who served alongside U.S. troops — will be resolved quickly.”

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah): “President Trump has described his recent order as a means ‘[to] temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies.’ In this spirit, I urge the new administration to move quickly to tailor its policy on visa issuance as narrowly as possible so that officials can protect our security needs while reducing unnecessary burdens on the vast majority of visa-seekers that present a promise—not a threat—to our nation."

Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.): "The United States is and has always been a generous nation when it comes to welcoming those who seek refuge and want to contribute. I expect that these executive orders are in fact temporary and that after the Administration strengthens the vetting process, we can continue our tradition of welcoming those who are persecuted in an orderly manner and without any kind of religious test."

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.): "The good news is it’s only got to do with a pause. The bad news is that obviously that this process and these conclusions were not vetted. There's so much confusion out there."

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio): "It is not a ban. However, I think it was not properly vetted. So, you have an extreme vetting proposal that didn't get the vetting it should have had. And as the result, in the implementation, we've seen some problems."

Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.): “I support the temporary entry restriction from certain nations until the administration, Congress and the American people know with confidence that any individual being granted admission does not pose a threat to our security. ... With all that being said, I will be closely monitoring the execution of this EO to make sure that any misapplication is corrected immediately.”

Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.): "We should value freedom & not surrender security. We can protect the homeland while upholding #religiousfreedom & refuge for the persecuted."

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.): "I support a comprehensive look at our vetting process, and I believe it’s something every new administration would be expected to do. However, reports of green card holders and those who assisted us in the war on terror being denied or delayed entry is deeply concerning. Such detention is unacceptable and must be remedied immediately."

Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R-Maine): "The congressman will not be voting on these Executive Orders. His policy in Congress has been to increase border security, end sanctuary cities and stop Syrian refugee admissions until national security agencies put in place effective processes to ensure that no suspected or potential terrorists are allowed to cross our borders."

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.): “It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the nation that President Trump’s executive order was not properly vetted. We are particularly concerned by reports that this order went into effect with little to no consultation with the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security."

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Link to statement: https://twitter.com/SenThomTillis/sta...

Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.): "The language of the order should not apply to legal permanent residents of the United States, and if it is being enforced in any other way, the administration should step in swiftly to clarify.”

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.): "America has long needed to tighten the vetting process for those seeking to come here. However, a religious test or ban is against everything our country stands for. We need to remember that some of our best sources of information that keeps our nation and our troops safe comes from our Muslim friends and allies."

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah): "I think it’s surprising a lot of people that he is actually doing what he said he was going to do, but there are those of us that actually support that. ... People that have a green card supposedly already have been vetted, so there needs to be some further clarification."

Rep. Jim Renacci (R-Ohio): "While I strongly encourage the Administration to examine more closely whether it is effectual and necessary to subject green card holders from these nations to this temporary order, I fully support our government's renewed commitment to keeping Americans of all faiths safe and free across our homeland."

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.): "This vetting proposal itself needed more vetting. More scrutiny of those traveling from war-torn countries to the United States is wise. But this broad and confusing order seems to ban legal, permanent residents with ‘green cards,’ and might turn away Iraqis, for example, who were translators and helped save lives of Americans troops and who could be killed if they stay in Iraq. And while not explicitly a religious test, it comes close to one which is inconsistent with our American character.”

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.): "We all share a desire to protect the American people, but this executive order has been poorly implemented, especially with respect to green card holders. The administration should immediately make appropriate revisions, and it is my hope that following a thorough review and implementation of security enhancements that many of these programs will be improved and reinstated.”

Rep. Jaime Herrara Beutler (R-Wash) Beutler said that while “security at our borders and enter checkpoints” is important and “can certainly be improved,” America “should be able to uphold is tradition of allowing those law-abiding foreign nationals – some of whom have put their own lives on the line to provide assistance to the U.S. on the battlefield – to proceed with their journeys.”

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news...

Source: The Washington Post
Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...


message 23: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 07:36PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Republicans who Support (31)

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.): "President Trump is right to make sure we are doing everything possible to know exactly who is entering our country."

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.): "With the stroke of a pen, he is doing more to shut down terrorist pathways into this country than the last Administration did in eight years.”

Rep. Lou Barletta (R-Pa.): “I commend President Trump for suspending the refugee program, and in particular for Syria and the six other countries, because they are unquestionably terrorist havens and hotspots."

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.): "I'm grateful that @realDonaldTrump is making the safety & security of the American people his top priority. His actions are very appropriate."

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.): "It's very prudent to say, 'Let's be careful about who comes into our country to make sure that they're not terrorists.'"

Rep. Dan Donovan (R-N.Y.): "President Trump's decision is in America's best interest, and I support exploring safe zones in the region to protect innocent life."

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.): “The primary duty of the federal government is to keep Americans safe. Today, President Trump has begun to fulfill this responsibility by taking a number of critical steps within his authority to strengthen national security and the integrity of our nation’s immigration system."

Rep. Dave Trott (R-Mich.): "Until we can adequately vet these refugees and ensure the safety of all Americans, I support President Trump's executive order to stay refugees from these terror-prone countries."

Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.): “My first and most important job is protecting families in our region and the American people … We must be absolutely certain we have systems in place capable of thoroughly vetting anyone applying for refugee status on American soil.”

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.): “It's simply wrong to call the president’s executive order concerning immigration and refugees ‘a religious test’ of any kind. I doubt many Arkansans or Americans more broadly object to taking a harder look at foreigners coming into our country from war-torn nations with known terror networks; I think they’re wondering why we don’t do that already."

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.): "He is doing what he told the American people he would do. I would not support a travel ban on Muslims; I do support increased vetting on people applying to travel from countries with extensive terrorist ties or activity. These seven countries meet that standard. Our top priority should be to keep Americans safe."

Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-Ala.): "I appreciate President Trump's efforts to address these issues as he works to keep the American people safe. While there have been some issues with the order's implementation, I look forward to working with the Trump Administration to make sure their efforts to protect the American people succeed in a timely and effective manner."

Rep. Scott Taylor (R-Va.): "While I do not agree with some of the rhetoric, taking a pause, figuring out if we are properly vetting people, and making changes if necessary to continue our American principles is prudent and needed. The safety and protection of our citizens must remain our number one priority."

Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.): "LONG OVERDUE: A freeze on Syrian refugees and a crackdown on sanctuary cities! Time to protect Americans."

Rep. Dennis Ross (R-Fla.): "This is long overdue. We must ensure our country is safe from radical Islamic jihadists who want to kill Americans."

Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Tex.): "I applaud President Trump's actions to vamp up the vetting of refugees attempting to enter our country.

Rep. Brian Babin (R-Tex.): "Great news -- now let's get it into law!"

Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio): "I support President Trump’s temporary, three month, precautionary action directed towards a handful of countries with a history of producing and exporting terrorists. These countries are either torn apart by violence, or under the control of hostile, jihadist governments."

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.): "'It is the federal government’s responsibility to protect the American people, and the Trump administration is following through on that responsibility."

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.)
Link to his statement: http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/po...

Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-Ind.): "The temporary suspension of the refugee program and admission of individuals from countries where terrorism poses an elevated threat will allow our national security officials to examine the vetting process and strengthen safeguards to prevent terrorists from entering our homeland. I hope the administration provides greater clarity in the coming days on its implementation of the order and its review of vetting procedures."

Rep. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.): “President Trump is ensuring that he is doing all he can to protect us from radical Islamic terror, and to secure channels of migration in the future. Though we would like to see a more specific definition worked through Congress, we understand the need for quick action, and we stand by him in this effort.”

Rep. Luke Messer (R-Ind.): "This is a pause, not a ban, while we work to ensure the U.S. has effective vetting processes in place to protect Americans from terrorist threats. The details will of course matter, but it's way past time for us to develop this capability, and President Trump is right to prioritize American safety until we get this done."

Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.): "At a time of grave security threats, President Trump is right to pause the flow of refugees from countries where terrorism is rampant until we can properly vet them and implement additional screening for individuals traveling to and from these countries."

Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.): "Just as President Obama suspended the refugee program in 2011 for six months, the Trump Administration is working to protect national security by making adjustments in the refugee vetting process. It is critical that we address the threat of individuals who come to our country to create chaos and threaten our freedom.”

Rep. Todd Rokita (R-Ind.): "This is not a ban on Muslim refugees, as the order specifically targets a select few nations with known terrorist networks and is similar to an executive order signed by President Obama without controversy in 2011. The President and his administration must now focus on the execution of this order, ensuring that it is implemented effectively and fairly."

Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Tex.): "It is important that our commander in chief puts the safety of Americans first. Given concerns about the inadequate vetting of refugees and problems with our immigration system, this temporary pause is intended to ensure the safety of our citizens."

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.): "In light of attempts by jihadist groups to infiltrate fighters into refugee flows to the West, along with Europe’s tragic experience coping with this problem, the Trump Administration’s executive order on refugees is a common-sense security measure to prevent terror attacks on the homeland. While accommodations should be made for green card holders and those who’ve assisted the U.S. armed forces, this is a useful temporary measure on seven nations of concern until we can verify who is entering the United States.”

Rep. Rod Blum (R-Iowa): "... The bottom line is they can’t properly vet people coming from war-torn areas like Syria and Iraq. If we can’t vet people properly, then we shouldn’t be allowing them into our country. I’m supportive of that.”

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.): "We have heard of brief delays among constituents and are empathetic to any inconveniences while traveling."

Rep. Roger Williams (R-Tex.): "President Trump is responsible for defending this country, and I think what we've seen in the last couple days with executive orders that he's passed, that's what he's doing."

Rep. Peter King (R-NY): Rep. Peter King said Sunday "he supported President Donald Trump’s executive order curbing the entry of refugees and legal immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries, but said he played no role in helping craft the policy".

Source: The Washington Post
Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...


message 24: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 04:11PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Unclear on these Republicans position:

Rep. Kay Granger (R-Tex.): "I am convinced that resident Trump made this decision because he believes it will make us safer."

Rep. Robert Pittenger (R-N.C.): "While we should be responsive to those who are persecuted for their faith or impacted by war, we need a thorough vetting of all refugees, consistent with the American Security Against Foreign Enemies Act (H.R. 4038), which I co-sponsored and helped pass with strong bipartisan support in 2015. This bipartisan legislation required the FBI, CIA, and Homeland Security to be engaged in the refugee vetting process to prevent access by infiltrated terrorists."

Source: The Washington Post
Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...


message 25: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 04:11PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
No comment so far (organized by chamber and state) - REPUBLICANS

SENATE

Alabama
Jeff Sessions
Richard Shelby

Alaska
Dan Sullivan
Lisa Murkowski

Arkansas
John Boozman

Georgia
David Perdue
Johnny Isakson

Idaho
Jim Risch
Mike Crapo

Indiana
Todd Young

Iowa
Joni Ernst
Chuck Grassley

Kansas
Pat Roberts
Jerry Moran

Kentucky
Rand Paul

Louisiana
Bill Cassidy
John Neely Kennedy

Mississippi
Roger Wicker
Thad Cochran

Montana
Steve Daines

Nebraska
Deb Fischer

Nevada
Dean Heller

North Carolina
Richard Burr

North Dakota
John Hoeven

Oklahoma
Jim Inhofe

Pennsylvania
Pat Toomey

South Carolina
Tim Scott

South Dakota
Mike Rounds
John Thune

Texas
Ted Cruz
John Cornyn

West Virginia
Shelley Moore Capito

Wisconsin
Ron Johnson

Wyoming
Mike Enzi

Source: The Washington Post
Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...


message 26: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 07:01PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
No comment so far (organized by chamber and state)- REPUBLICANS

HOUSE

Alabama
Martha Roby
Mike Rogers
Robert Aderholt
Mo Brooks
Gary Palmer

Alaska
Don Young

Arizona
Martha McSally
Paul Gosar
Andy Biggs
David Schweikert
Trent Franks

Arkansas
Rick Crawford
French Hill
Steve Womack
Bruce Westerman

California
Doug LaMalfa
Tom McClintock
Paul Cook
Jeff Denham
David Valadao
Kevin McCarthy
Steve Knight
Ken Calvert
Mimi Walters
Dana Rohrabacher
Darrell Issa
Duncan Hunter

Colorado
Scott Tipton
Ken Buck
Doug Lamborn

Florida
Matt Gaetz
Neal Dunn
Ted Yoho
John Rutherford
Ron DeSantis
Bill Posey
Daniel Webster
Gus Bilirakis
Tom Rooney
Brian Mast
Francis Rooney
Mario Díaz-Balart

Georgia
Buddy Carter
Drew Ferguson
Tom Price
Rob Woodall
Austin Scott
Doug Collins
Jody Hice
Barry Loudermilk
Rick Allen
Tom Graves

Idaho
Raúl Labrador
Mike Simpson

Illinois
Peter Roskam
Mike Bost
Rodney Davis
Randy Hultgren
John Shimkus
Darin LaHood

Indiana
Jim Banks
Susan Brooks
Larry Bucshon
Trey Hollingsworth

Iowa
David Young
Steve King

Kansas
Lynn Jenkins
Kevin Yoder

Kentucky
James Comer
Brett Guthrie
Thomas Massie
Hal Rogers
Andy Barr

Louisiana
Clay Higgins
Mike Johnson
Ralph Abraham
Garret Graves

Maryland
Andy Harris

Michigan
Jack Bergman
Bill Huizenga
John Moolenaar
Fred Upton
Tim Walberg
Mike Bishop
Paul Mitchell

Minnesota
Jason Lewis
Erik Paulsen
Tom Emmer

Mississippi
Trent Kelly
Gregg Harper
Steven Palazzo

Missouri
Ann Wagner
Blaine Luetkemeyer
Vicky Hartzler
Sam Graves
Billy Long
Jason Smith

Montana
Ryan Zinke

Nebraska
Jeff Fortenberry
Don Bacon
Adrian Smith

Nevada
Mark Amodei

New Jersey
Frank LoBiondo
Tom MacArthur
Chris Smith
Leonard Lance
Rodney Frelinghuysen

New Mexico
Steve Pearce

New York
John Faso
Claudia Tenney
Tom Reed
John Katko
Chris Collins

Source: The Washington Post
Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...


message 27: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 07:34PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
No comment so far (organized by chamber and state)- REPUBLICANS

HOUSE (continued)


North Carolina
George Holding
Walter Jones J
Virginia Foxx
David Rouzer
Robert Pittenger
Patrick McHenry
Mark Meadows
Ted Budd

North Dakota
Kevin Cramer

Ohio
Steve Chabot
Brad Wenstrup
Jim Jordan
Bob Latta
Bob Gibbs
Warren Davidson
Mike Turner
Pat Tiberi
David Joyce
Steve Stivers

Oklahoma
Jim Bridenstine
Markwayne Mullin
Frank Lucas
Tom Cole

Oregon
Greg Walden

Pennsylvania
Mike Kelly
Scott Perry
Glenn Thompson
Ryan Costello
Pat Meehan
Bill Shuster
Tom Marino
Keith Rothfus
Lloyd Smucker
Timothy Murphy

South Carolina
Mark Sanford
Joe Wilson
Trey Gowdy
Mick Mulvaney
Tom Rice

South Dakota
Kristi Noem

Tennessee
Phil Roe
Jimmy Duncan
Chuck Fleischmann
Scott DesJarlais
Diane Black
Marsha Blackburn
David Kustoff

Texas
Louie Gohmert
Ted Poe
Sam Johnson
Jeb Hensarling
John Culberson
Kevin Brady
Mike Conaway
Mac Thornberry
Randy Weber
Bill Flores
Lamar Smith
Pete Olson
Will Hurd
Kenny Marchant
Michael Burgess
Blake Farenthold
John Carter

Utah
Rob Bishop
Chris Stewart
Mia Love

Virginia
Rob Wittman
Thomas Garrett
Dave Brat
Morgan Griffith

Washington
Dan Newhouse

West Virginia
David McKinley
Alex Mooney
Evan Jenkins

Wisconsin
Glenn Grothman
Sean Duffy
Mike Gallagher

Wyoming
Liz Cheney

Source: The Washington Post
Whip Count: Here’s where Republicans stand on Trump’s controversial travel ban
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...


message 28: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 09:06PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
CNN has given an update on green card holders who may be out of the country and are coming back:

Green card holders will be expedited and it appears allowed to come back in - but will go through some additional vetting but it appears it will be expedited. I am assuming they are talking about green card holders only from the seven designated countries. I am assuming that green card holders from all other countries will be OK and not have to even go through extra expediting.

Green Card A QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE TO USA GREEN CARDS & VISAS by James L. Benson by James L. Benson (no photo)

Update: Priebus: Immigration ban won’t affect green card holders going forward - Updated January 29, 2017 8:23 PM
Link: http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/tr...


message 29: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 07:52PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Democrats are mostly universally against this order and how it was rolled out:

* Against order: Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., applauded the injunction issued against President Trump’s “unbelievable” action, calling it a “victory for American values” against a “discriminatory order.” “It’s clear that the president gave little consideration to the chaos and heartbreak that would result,” Feinstein added.

* Against order: Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY., "Democrats will fight Trump’s ‘unconstitutional’ refugee ban, Chuck Schumer says
January 29, 2017 1:50 PM - Democrats will fight President Donald Trump’s “unconstitutional” refugee ban, pledged a teary-eyed Sen. Charles Schumer on Sunday. Surround by refugees from Iraq and Syria, the Senate minority leader said he and his colleagues would draft legislation to overturn the president’s executive order, signed on Friday. He demanded the president reverse course.

* Against order: Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash and Rep. Suzan DelBene - Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., released a statement calling the executive order “barbaric.” She and fellow Washington Democrat Rep. Suzan DelBene applauded the Federal judicial decision to issue a temporary stay on immigrants in airports around the country.

* Against Order: Democratic Washington Rep. Adam Smith said the president is acting in “direct contrast to our nation’s proud history of helping those in need.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news...


message 30: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 07:32PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Did Rudy Guiliani have something to do with this?

This is the Daily News report and on Fox News:

Rudy Giuliani said Donald Trump came to him for guidance on implementing a so-called “Muslim ban” and from that, he helped construct the controversial order crippling international travel from predominantly Muslim countries.

The ex-NYC mayor said he pitched the ban, not as a religious prohibition, but one focused on “danger,” he said on Fox News late Saturday.

“I’ll tell you the whole history of it,” Giuliani told Jeanine Pirro as a Brooklyn judge thwarted President Trump’s executive order. “When he first announced it, he said ‘Muslim ban.’ ”

“He called me up, he said ‘put a commission together, show me the right way to do it, legally.’ ”

Last year in May, Trump suggested that Giuliani lead a think group to study “the Swiss cheese” border to Mexico. As the presumptive Republican nominee, Trump told Fox News that a Muslim immigration ban was just a“suggestion.”

Giuliani named former federal Judge Michael Mukasey, Rep. Peter King and Texas Rep. Michael McCaul as additional architects of the ban, which came to fruition when Trump signed the executive order on Friday.

He detailed the ban’s history as Pirro asked how Trump settled on the seven countries in the Middle East and Africa, including the war-torn Syria.

Pirro expressed surprise that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were not on Trump's list, citing that one of the assailants behind the December 2015 San Bernardino attack was born in Pakistan and came to the U.S. through Saudi Arabia.

In response, the Trump surrogate gave Saudi Arabia the benefit of the doubt, despite his having overseen the Big Apple during the 9/11 terrorist attack. The majority of the hijackers who orchestrated the deadly plot hailed from the oil-rich country

“Saudi Arabia is going through a massive change,” he said. “I think that the kingdom particularly under the new prince has a real understanding that we're dealing with a massive radicalization terrorist problem. It is not the old Saudi Arabia.”

He then confused President Trump for his predecessor and said “President Obama is dealing with the new Saudi Arabia.”

Giuliani failed to elaborate on why Pakistan was not mentioned in Trump's ban, but admitted that it "troubles" him.

Source: Daily News and a Video

Link: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/polit...

Note: If the above is valid - then Rep King from New York and Texas Rep. Michael McCaul were some of the architects of this ban - I guess we would know what their position was if that were the case - they would obviously be for the ban if they had input into it. However, King is saying that he was not an architect of the ban but he supports it.

Rep. Peter King says he had no role in writing immigration ban
Updated January 29, 2017 8:35 PM
- Source: Newsday
Link: http://www.newsday.com/long-island/po...

Leadership by Rudolph W. Giuliani by Rudolph W. Giuliani(no photo)

Terrible Beauty by Peter T. King by Peter T. King (no photo) - Representative King wrote three books.


message 31: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration: What We Know and What We Don’t
By LIAM STACKJAN. 29, 2017


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us...

Source: New York Times


message 32: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 11:21PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
The protests and the outrage on how this has unfolded - we believe has changed some hearts and minds (possibly including the President's) - this is from what I can see - a major walking this order back - hopefully this will allow any wrongs to be rectified and also protect the American people - many Republicans abandoned the President on this order and the Democrats already had been against the order itself - you can tell that the media is being blamed for simply telling the truth. Bills will be brought before Congress over this and court filings have already taken place and will continue.

Trump Says U.S. Will Resume Issuing Visas to All Countries Over Next 90 Days
Reuters
4:54 PM EST

President Donald Trump, trying to quell a backlash over his "extreme vetting" order, said the United States would resume issuing visas to all countries once secure policies are put in place over the next 90 days.

Under an order he signed on Friday, immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries were barred from entering the United States. The decision has drawn large protests at many U.S. airports, where some travelers from those countries have been stranded.

"To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting," Trump said. "This is not about religion—this is about terror and keeping our country safe. There are over 40 different countries worldwide that are majority Muslim that are not affected by this order."We will again be issuing visas to all countries once we are sure we have reviewed and implemented the most secure policies over the next 90 days," he said.

Source: Fortune Magazine

Update: CNN is reporting that Trump thinks that this executive order was a brilliant success - Note: Most people would simply say "Wrong"


message 33: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 10:38PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Deadly Shooting at Quebec Mosque (Quebec City, Canada)
Occurring in the country of Canada - this was a coordinated attack with at least two gunmen. Considered a terrorist attack. Some far right groups have been followed for months. Unfortunately 6 are dead, eight are wounded. There is gun control in Canada but somehow these gunmen had automatic weapons.

Mr. Trudeau assailed what he called “this terrorist attack on Muslims in a center of worship and refuge.”

“It is heart-wrenching to see such senseless violence,” he said in a statement early Monday. “Diversity is our strength, and religious tolerance is a value that we, as Canadians, hold dear.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/wo...

Source: The New York Times

Note: Two suspects in the shooting were arrested, Quebec City police spokesman Constable Pierre Poirier said.


message 34: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 29, 2017 10:36PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
ACLU lawyers helped draft an emergency stay motion - filed a lawsuit on behalf of a nationwide class action

****Seeking protection for all detainees across the country so they cannot be deported due to this executive order

****Constitutional right to freedom of religion - the naked intent was to discriminate against groups of people and their religion - this is the ACLU's belief

Source: CNN

Roger Nash Baldwin and the American Civil Liberties Union by Robert C. Cottrell by Robert C. Cottrell (no photo)

More:
Website for the American Civil Liberties Union - https://www.aclu.org


message 35: by Melly (new)

Melly (mellysw) Im an enthusiastic supporter of Trump, and a supporter of when he spoke about enhanced vetting.

Now I have been ridiculously busy the last couple days so I haven't had the chance to pay as much attention to this as it deserves.

But at first glance, I think Trump screwed up. He has been working like a madman, and I think this is a case of him working too quickly on a serious issue that needed more care.

At least I hope.

Most of what I know about the order I like. Except I think people with green cards should be exempted from it. If you need to revisit green cards fine, but the level of urgency is far less.

This was handled badly. People being detained in airports is retarded.

At the same time, there seems to be - at times - over reaction from opponents of Trump. Like most Trump supporters I have a deep distrust of any media outlet or persona where I know there bias. Unlike many Trump supporters my distrust holds true for right wing media outlets as well. I don't think Bannon is a "literal nazi" but I am suspicious of him. I rather hope this is his brainchild and Trump ends up firing him. Both left and right wing media are inflaming this issue to epic proportions.


message 36: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 30, 2017 12:28AM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Thank you Melly for posting - it is good to hear from everyone no matter what side you are on. I respect your right to be for Trump.

I think we can agree that Bannon's hand was certainly stirring the pot and that this has created chaos this weekend. The strategy and rationale for what they did and how they did it and the execution of the order itself were all tragically flawed. I think Trump screwed up too and he will be doing that more often if he relies on Bannon for his own thinking and good sense. Bannon could potentially bring him down - I too hope for his firing.

Folks with green cards and approved visas should have been handled differently even if they needed more in depth vetting. They should not have been denied entry or sent back! (which is what happened in some cases)

I am sure that there are diametrically opposed opinions on this situation but this was a bad idea - there was no defined or explained rationale for these countries being selected when in fact zero terrorists who committed acts in this country are from any of these targets countries - in fact - Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, UAE, Lebanon, Russia (Boston Marathon) are the countries where terrorists have come from (the 9/11 hijackers for example, etc). I do not have a mistrust of main stream media and I source all news - Reuters and Associated Press or NPR for the most part are not biased. PBS is also not biased. I think that what happened to these people this weekend was horrid and was of epic meanness and insensitivity or just plain incompetence.

I think that the constitution should be adhered to and I too want our country to be safe and not be taken over by any theocrats of any religion. That is why we have a separation of church from state. And none of us want any terrorist attacks in this country either. But you cannot have an executive order focused on religious choice. Plugging the holes and doing a better job with vetting is an obvious goal of any order but how this unfolded - the execution itself - was sloppy, lacked the necessary planning and details and lacked any coordination whatsoever with Congress, the Department of Homeland Security, think tanks, or the State Department for starters. Some of the administration's pundits want to say that this is a list that Obama had and that the countries selected were countries where these terrorist organizations are trained.

I have attached an article which outlines the differences and the actual facts:

The Pinocchio Test

So what's the difference with Trump's action?

First, Obama responded to an actual threat - the discovery that two Iraqi refugees has been implicated in bomb-making in Iraq that had targeted U.S. troops. Under congressional pressure, officials decided to reexamine all previous refugees and also impose new screening procedures, which led to a slowdown in processing new applications. Trump, by contrast, issued his executive order without any known triggering threat.

Second, Obama did not announce there was a ban on visa applications. In fact, as seen in Napolitano's answer to Collins, administration officials danced around that question. There was certainly a lot of news reporting that visa applications had been slowed to a trickle. But the Obama administration never said it was their policy to halt all applications. Even so, the delays did not go unnoticed, so there was a lot of critical news reporting at the time about the angst of Iraqis waiting for approval.

Third, Obama's policy did not prevent all citizens of that country, including green-card holders, from traveling the United States. Trump's policy is much more sweeping.

We have sought comment from the White House and also from Obama administration officials and so may update this if more information becomes available. But so far this is worthy of at least Two Pinocchios

Source for the above: Chicago Tribune - http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/na...

However, there are always points of agreement when folks discuss the situation with respect and that is what we try to do here. Living in the Metro NYC area makes me very cognizant of safety and security and nobody wants to place our city at risk. Extra screening is not a bad thing - nobody would disagree. But not allowing green card and proper visa holders to get on the plane or when they arrive that they are turned back is unconscionable.

And what about the poor 5 year old boy who was detained (an American citizen)?

Senator Van Hollen said, “It is outrageous that a 5 year old boy — an American citizen and Maryland resident — was detained for more than 4 hours this evening at Dulles airport.”

This is what transpired:

Senator Van Hollen said - "It is outrageous that a 5 year old boy -- an American citizen and Maryland resident -- was detained for more than 4 hours this evening at Dulles airport. He was held despite the fact that we gave the authorities advance notice of his arrival earlier today and, when I called later in the evening, they refused to say whether he had been released or was still in custody. Shame on you, Donald Trump. And thank goodness for the federal judge who upheld the rule of law and temporarily blocked the implementation of Trump’s removal order. We must remain vigilant and fight back.

I have to disagree with you on the point that this was an over reaction - the way this was unfolded caused major suffering to a lot of people needlessly which could have been avoided with an integrated consultative approach. Let us hope that the kinks are worked out and the rule of law prevails.

Thank you for posting - everybody's input is respected and appreciated.


message 37: by Melly (last edited Jan 30, 2017 12:42AM) (new)

Melly (mellysw) Thank you for your respectful response. :) It's always a pleasure to listen to other people's ideas.

I respectfully disagree with you on NPR, AP, etc. PBS I am not that familiar with but I will say they are biased too. There is no such thing as unbiased media anymore. The best you can get is an org trying to hide their bias. My solution is to watch and read as many points of view as possible, and locate primary sources for info when possible.

I am definitely in agreement with you that the approach to green card carriers is a stupid move.

From what I hear Trump chose the targetted countries from an Obama administration list of countries with active terrorism issues. I dont agree with the list and I think Trump should have done his own work on that.

It was not, in my opinion, religious based. All citizens from targetted countries are treated the same, muslim or not. And there are plenty of muslim majority countries not on the list.

I can see your point on over-reaction. The reaction was appropriate except for the violence that happened here and there. I concede that point to you. :)


message 38: by Dimitri (new)

Dimitri | 600 comments While I'm not against the idea of restricted entry in these times, Trump has used a brush that is too broad. This measure needs more specifications and/or excemptions, so that veterans of Middle Eastern descent - for one - can enter the country they serve.

And yes, it manages to affect my life. I plan a trip to the centennial commemoration of the Battle of Vimy Ridge with an Iranian-American WWI buff of 50 years' law-abiding residence...in April. It looks doubtful he'll make it.


message 39: by Melly (new)

Melly (mellysw) Dimitri, I completely agree. I hope you and your friend get to take that trip.


message 40: by Samanta (new)

Samanta   (almacubana) I have a question, as a nearly 95% ignorant on this whole issue. Is it true what is being shared on social media that this was Obama's doing first and that Trump just recycled? They also say that the countries he has an interest in did not go under this ban.


message 41: by Melly (new)

Melly (mellysw) I havent been on social media as much as I usually am but Im not seeing either of those.

Im seeing that Trumps list was a list of terrorist rich areas that the Obama admin drew up, but thats it.


message 42: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 30, 2017 11:34AM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Melly wrote: "Thank you for your respectful response. :) It's always a pleasure to listen to other people's ideas.

I respectfully disagree with you on NPR, AP, etc. PBS I am not that familiar with but I will sa..."


Disagree strongly on PBS, Reuters and Associated Press - NPR tries to be neutral and present both sides but I think that would be the only one of the above that is not 100% of the time neutral but they have a very good record overall in comparison to a Fox or an MSNBC for example.

In fact, the list of countries chosen by Obama was for the purpose of strengthening vetting but according to state department officials today - the State Dept. claimed that nobody was stopped from coming in via visa or in terms of refugee status - it just was revamped and that was done with all National Intelligence groups, Congress, Defense, State Department, CIA and the Department of Homeland Security being involved every step of the way. Nothing was done in isolation and it was vastly and totally different. The above has all been factually verified by numerous sources.

The problem with this is that there are videos and interviews where Trump himself said just that - that it was a Muslim ban - now he is trying to walk that back as well - even though there is video confirmation including his stating that Christians would get priority. So religion was entered into the equation by this White House team and Trump and now they are trying to walk that back. I am not sure that they are going to be able to do that successfully. I think the damage has been done by his rhetoric which has been recorded and on video and even in his recent interview on ABC.

I appreciate your input - I really do Melly and your participation on this thread and though there are points of disagreement - there are also many points where folks sense agreement that this was too broad and ineffectively executed in isolation causing confusion and an uproar and some needless angst with allies.


message 43: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Dimitri wrote: "While I'm not against the idea of restricted entry in these times, Trump has used a brush that is too broad. This measure needs more specifications and/or excemptions, so that veterans of Middle Ea..."

Yes, he has Dimitri. I am sorry about your Iranian colleague. It doesn't appear possible from what I can see - but then again if he is not coming to the United States - maybe he can meet you elsewhere.


message 44: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Samanta wrote: "I have a question, as a nearly 95% ignorant on this whole issue. Is it true what is being shared on social media that this was Obama's doing first and that Trump just recycled? They also say that t..."

No - Obama never had an order like this at any time. Never were green card holders or visa holders sent back or turned away like some folks were this past weekend. Never happened. Obama with the input from Congress was looking at a foiled terrorist attempt by two Iraqi refugees -an actual threat not an imagined or political one like Trump.

The Washington Post has updated its response and now gives Trump and his team - three Pinocchios versus just two as I previously reported.

There is one falsehood after another coming from this team - non stop. So fact checking is being done continuously.

Here is the story and the update so that you have the facts that are known:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/f...

Source: The Washington Post

I have no idea what you mean by this sentence - They also say that the countries he has an interest in did not go under this ban.

What folks have criticized Trump for is that there was no threat from these specific countries in terms of past terrorist activities for either immigrants or refugees aside from of course the one that President Obama foiled (they were from Iraq). But why were there no sanctions on Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, Lebanon and Pakistan for example where terrorists on US soil did come from. That is what is being questioned as well. Also Obama never stopped visa and green card holders from getting back into the country which happened this past weekend - some were sent back to their country of origin no less. Of course, the Trump administration walked that back after the public uproar.

I am not sure if I have answered your questions.


message 45: by Samanta (new)

Samanta   (almacubana) You did, Bentley!

I was actually referring to what you wrote here:

"But why were there no sanctions on Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, Lebanon and Pakistan for example where terrorists on US soil did come from. That is what is being questioned as well."

I've seen posts on Facebook claiming those countries were not on the list because he has a business interest there. This could of course, just be an attempt to undermine Trump's credibility, but I wanted to hear the opinion of U.S. citizens.

This is in no way my opinion (simply because I do not have enough information to form an opinion on Trump) and that is why I was asking.


message 46: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Jan 30, 2017 12:00PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Today Trump stated on video that Schumer was acting, that his tears were fake, and that he did not feel that bad about the executive order and what acting school did he attend? (I will let others judge the merit of this statement which is a callous one in my opinion).

Secondly, a statement was issued by Trump that another cause of the disturbance at the airports was Delta's computer issues (lol).

An appalling excuse really since the order came out on Friday and caused absolute chaos on Friday and Saturday even before Delta even knew about any computer glitch on Sunday. That dog does not hunt.

And had nothing to do with the protests, the detainments, the court orders, the folks with green cards and visas being sent back to their country of origin, or a 5 year old boy who is an American citizen being detained for 4 hours even with advance notification of his arrival by senators and mayors, or a Syrian refugee family with visas being sent back on a return flight, or a 77 year old grandmother with health issues being detained for over 24 hours with the proper paperwork and not being able to speak English, and the list goes on and on.

It is appalling really that this is the best rationale that the administration can come up with on why there was chaos at all of the airports - and they refuse to apologize or take responsibility for Bannon writing this order without input from the proper experts - which he is not. Or for not explaining the order which they put out to the folks who were supposed to enforce it.

And then Priebus goes on the Sunday talk shows and tries to walk back what happened and says that going forward that the green card holders and visa holders will now be let in after some were already placed on planes back to their country of origin for 16 hour flights.

This is just at its best - absolute incompetence and blatant disregard for what they placed so many folks through - not only the refugees, immigrants, but the Department of Homeland Security, the airport personnel, the police etc. and so many others.

This can only be explained as insensitivity and brazen disregard for the intense pain and suffering they caused.

Let us hope that Congress informs the President and his team how things are supposed to be done and somehow the dust settles on this once and for all. I am sure that the courts will be busy for awhile on suits that have already been filed. This will ultimately I believe have to be settled in the courts.


message 47: by Samanta (new)

Samanta   (almacubana) This will ultimately I believe have to be settled in the courts.

Do you think it will do any good? Or is it just going to be an immense expense for those filing complaints?


message 48: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Samanta - there are all sorts of hypotheses about this or that. But what I judge as a primary source is what I hear and see coming out of the mouths of Trump and his cohorts.

News teams have stated that Trump did not want to hurt his business interests or his sons allegedly.

I will leave that for others to decide but these other countries have many documented instances of terrorism abroad and not only in the US - so ultimately others will have to make up their own minds as to why these countries did not make the list and others which had no actual acts were on there.

Of course Obama foiled a terrorist attack by the two Iraqi refugees but that did not actually take place like the ones did from the other countries.

One reason they are trying to give now is that there are training camps in these specific countries. That could be but that still does not explain this order and why it applied to green card and visa holders and why they were sent back after having this paper work - now they are saying these guys can come back but need to go through some extensive questioning but will be let in. This whole thing changes every time they come out and make a statement.

This executive order was allegedly written by Bannon in isolation with some possible input from Miller absent the people who should have been involved - the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, CIA, the intelligence and defense departments, the elite members of Congress but none were. And then it was rolled out without any clarifying documentation to the enforcers. Hence a big mess.


message 49: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Feb 01, 2017 02:55PM) (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
This is from Fox News and other sources - for Trump supporters - here are the companies/universities coming out against the executive order and what they had to say:

AGAINST EXECUTIVE ORDER AND HAVE COME OUT AGAINST ORDER (VERBALLY OR IN WRITING)
Nike
Starbucks
Coca Cola
Y Combinator
Scribd
Yelp
Foursquare
Shutterstock
Ford CEO was on television
Grail
Kickstarter
Apple
Citi
Intel
Amazon
Netflix
Blackrock
Expedia
New York Times Co.
Merck
Illumina
The Times
Bayerische Motoren Werke AG
Google
Alphabet
eBay
Facebook - Zuckerberg
American Civil Liberties Union
Morgan Stanley - Tepid statement
Airbnb
New York taxi drivers’ union
North American Meat Institute
Tesla
Goldman Sachs
Citigroup
JP Morgan Chase - on television - but tepid statement against
Twitter
Uber
Lyft
Yale University - Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization
Koch Network
Urban Justice Center
National Immigration Law Center
University of Maryland
Square, Inc
Zynga
Mastercard
Allergan PLC
Biotech
LinkedIn
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Salesforce
Box
General Electric
Trip Advisor
Chorus
Path
Skift
WPP
Stripe
Ziggeo CEO Susan Danziger
Homebrew Venture partners Hunter Walk and Satya Patel
Nest
Intercom CEO Eoghan McCabe
Union Square Ventures partner Fred Wilson, Joanne Wilson, Amy Batchelor and Brad Feld
USV partner Albert Wenger
Shark Tank star - Chris Sacca
Allergen
Microsoft
Interpublic Group of Cos.
McKinsie
IBM - Tepid
Slack CEO Stewart Butterfield
Xamarin co-founder Nat Friedman
Sequoia Capital’s Mike Vernal
Charles River Ventures partner Izhar Armony
SpaceX
Facebook’s head of advertising Andrew “Boz” Bosworth
Arnold Schwarzenegger - not a company but Celebrity Apprentice host - said it makes us look stupid
Bates College - Maine
Bowdoin College - Maine
Colby College - Maine
University of New England - Maine
The Association of American Universities (AAU), which represents 62 schools, urged Trump to reverse the order. It said the order will send top scholars to countries that compete with the United States academically, like Canada, Australia and Germany
Harvard - Massachusetts
MIT - Massachusetts
Northeastern - Massachusetts
Portland State University - Oregon
Indiana University - Indiana
University of Michigan - Michigan
Princeton - New York
Cornell University - New York
Stanford - California
Columbia -New York
New York University - New York
Johns Hopkins University - Maryland
Brown - Rhode Island
University of Notre Dame
Dartmouth - New Hampshire
University of Massachusetts - some of it professors were caught up in this mess
Github
Twilio
Adroll
Pepsicola
Scribd
Wells Fargo
Bank of America
Merrill Lynch


Here is the article and video:
http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/01/30...

More:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/netf...
http://kdvr.com/2017/01/29/tech-compa...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/30/news/...
https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/29/som...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/us...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/bu...
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/...
https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-sc...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/na... - Immigration Hotline Set Up
http://observer.com/2017/01/new-yorks...
http://www.voanews.com/a/us-universit...
http://www.usnews.com/news/education-...
http://statements.cornell.edu/2017/20...
http://www.businessinsider.com/bank-o...

Source: Market Watch, Fox News, CNN, TechCrunch, New York Times, Bloomberg, Attorney- NY site, US News, USA Today, Business Insider


message 50: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44200 comments Mod
Clarification: Syrian Refugees according to this order are not allowed in indefinitely


« previous 1
back to top