Help me understand...why are people calling it a 'Muslim ban'?

Great Debates
1

I keep hearing this, but it seems over the top rhetoric to me. Trump, in his infinite wisdom has increased the vetting and restricted the travel ability of people from a small group of countries. He’s not stopping Muslims or anyone else coming in from others…hell, he’s allowing folks to come from Egypt and Saudi Arabia no problem afaict, as well as other countries in the ME. If, as seems likely, he next targets Mexico, will that be a ‘Christian ban’?? It seems to me that by focusing on this aspect a lot of folks are getting carried away, and also probably playing right into his small fingered hands by losing focus on what he’s really doing.

There is no doubt what he’s doing is vile and, at least from what I’ve seen, illegal. It’s already being challenged in the courts and it’s only a matter of time, IMHO, before it’s overturned. Of more concern, to me, is the focus on actual illegal immigrants, as there are literally millions of them, especially from Mexico. To me, the worry is that by diverting folks into a frenzy about ‘Muslim bans’ he is putting things in place to start hammering illegal immigrants and rounding them up to send back to places like Mexico…and he’s doing it like a magician, showing what’s in one hand while setting up the trick in the other. Eventually he will have to concede that folks with legal status in the US will have to be allowed in…but, oh, we are already focused on all these illegal types and we will start processing and getting rid of these people to protect good, hard workin’ Americans and get those good, high paid and good benefit low skill manufacturing jobs back, as the gods intended!!

So, help me out here…why is what he doing a ‘Muslim ban’? Why are folks so overly focused on this, when it seems to me to be pretty small potatoes (obviously not for the few hundred people involved, but in the greater scheme of things)? There are 45 MILLION immigrants in the US…and millions of illegals, especially from places like Mexico. This issue everyone is worked up about is affecting a few hundred or maybe a few thousand. To me, it’s all a trick, a slight of hand to distract the public and the press, give them something to get riled about, and wear them down for worse things to come. No? Am I missing some key aspect of this?

(Full disclosure…my family is from Mexico and didn’t come here by, um, legal means. So, I’m perhaps overly sensitive to this issue and maybe am fixated on what I think of as the elephant in the room being ignored because of the evil kid burning ants with a magnifier. I’m not trying to be unsympathetic to the obvious plight of the folks being caught in Trumps evil gears, just think there is more going on here…or that I’m missing something key)

2

Every one of the countries is Muslim-majority, he’s specifically said there will be a different set of procedures for Christians, and Trump himself called the proposal a Muslim ban during the election, how could you possibly twist this to NOT being a Muslim ban?

3

Because he’s banning Muslims. He wants to let in Christians from those countries and just keep the Muslims out.

Yeah, there are other Muslim majority countries he could ban, but he has business interests in lots of those, they are more important allies than the banned countries, or they would be problematic otherwise.

4

Egypt and Saudi are Muslim majority countries as well. Also, from what I recall reading earlier this ban is also affecting Christians coming from those countries. So…not seeing it. Can you go into more detail? I’m not trying to be a pain in the ass, I really don’t get it.

5

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

-Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the cowardice of German intellectuals following the Nazis’ rise to power

6

As for “not being a Muslim ban” It could be plausible to think so… until big mouth Rudy Giuliani spilled the beans.

7

I assume the counter-argument would focus on the fact that over 90% of the world’s Muslim population lives in countries unaffected by the order and that, while the Trump has indicated that the refugee program should emphasize Christians, Christians who are nationals of the seven countries are (as far as I know) also subject to the ban.

8

This chartmay be helpful. It’s as Snarky_Kong said: it’s a combination of banning muslims but only those from countries where he has no business interest. So he’s a corrupt bigot, not just a bigot.

9

Because Trump said he’d institute a Muslim Ban. If you want to argue that doesn’t adequately describe this EO, fine, but it’s him following through on what he promised.

10

I’m more worried about the ‘first, Trump distracted the public and wore them down, then he…’ scenario. There doesn’t seem to be any end to folks speaking out about what he’s doing, so I don’t see how it really applies…it’s literally in all the news both regular US and foreign and being talked about and debated/argued everywhere.

11

I’m curious: can you show me where in the EO he identifies the countries that are subject to the ban?

12

That’s not true. The executive order has two parts. The visa part has nothing about a “different set of procedures for Christians”. And the refugee part talks about giving preferential treatment to persecuted religious minorities. Imagine that! Preferential treatment to persecuted religious minorities in the context of refugee resettlement. Trump is a monster.

13

Guys, give up. This is obviously going to be one of those “special pleading” threads where no amount of evidence is going to be sufficient.

14

Ah, horseshit. If you have nothing to say or contribute except your own special plea and don’t let the door hit you in the ass. If you have some argument or evidence by all means, trot it out.

15

Step 1. “I, Donald J. Trump, am calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

Step 2. Per Rudy Giuliani in the link above, Trump put together a team to tell him how he could institute a Muslim ban legally. They basically came up with this EO.

Step 3. “This isn’t a Muslim ban.” <wink>

16

Sure. It doesn’t. Because of this ambiguity the Department of Homeland Security cleared it up:

As an aside: The number of US citizens killed since 9/11 by terrorists from these countries? Zero.

17

First they came for the Muslims, and I said…
Not this time, you son of a bitch.

18

Post #2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 15, and 16. Plus common sense, and that all the counter-arguments boil down to “well, he didn’t manage to ban ALL the Muslims, so he’s really not banning any of them.”

But fine. I’m out. And I believe–with all honesty–that if Trump were to create death camps tomorrow, he’d still have supporters saying “well, this dude said something bad about Trump and DIDN’T get killed, so there are no death camps!”

The standards of evidence demanded for anything anti-Trump ceased to be reasonable early in the election and are now do far divorced from reality that there’s no rational discourse still available. So yes, I’m out.

19

" I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas)."

Annotated text of executive order.

“For the next 90 days, nearly all travelers, except U.S. citizens, traveling on passports from Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Iran, Somalia, Libya, and Yemen will be temporarily suspended from entry to the United States.”

Homeland Security clarification. Because this administration is incompetent.

20

I don’t think it’s ambiguous at all. It applies to “aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12).” You do have to go to two other sources to determine what those countries are, but I don’t think that’s ambiguous. (You can find the list on the CBP website).

My question for JcWoman and others who are making the argument Trump picked the list based on which countries he had business interests in is: what is the basis for that assertion when Trump didn’t pick the list?

Edit:

You got in while I was typing, but same point on “incompetent” as on “ambiguous”