Study Reveals 72 Terrorists Came From Countries Covered by Trump Vetting Order

[Blur4stuff]

More Americans kill Americans than anyone from those countries. Maybe we should ban travel to the USA if you're from the USA.

[AlphaOut]

No, that's the difference between relatively sane antiterror tactics and stupid bullshit like travel bans.

So you believe, whether you have inside Intel or not, that if the department of homeland security has tracked terror networks moving through specific countries, that those countries should be free to travel here under the current vetting process regardless of a potential threat? It's a hypothetical question of course. I personally believe if the DHS has even the slightest reason to believe there is a threat they should act immediately. Its an inconvenience, but thats the price we pay for the past two administration's failing horribly on the war in the middle east, and relations with those countries. Honestly, I feel this temporary ban was blown way out of proportion.

- - - Updated - - -

Since you keep dodging the question the answer is: Zero lives were lost. They were never actually planning any terrorist attacks in the US at all. What they were trying to do was provide material support to al Qaeda...but the FBI caught them before they could do that.

Which would have led to the unknown, right? Therefore you can only assume malicious intent regardless of who was or wasnt hurt. Anyone who comes to our country should come with good intentions. The fact that you find that they were here as not a big deal shocks me. They shouldn't have been able to get through in the first place since our current vetting process is so good and all.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

The only reason any terrorists are born in America is because in America you have that opportunity, any other nation stamps out dissidents quicker than anything but then people like you scream "Human Rights!" and call them Tyrants.

See how that works? America is hated because we give the Freedom to hate.

This is a joke, right? Please tell me you are not being serious.

[Damajin]

God forbid people believe laws should serve the good of society even when its values or circumstances shift.

Except that its values or circumstances haven't shifted all that much, and that's really my ultimate point which you fail to grasp.

The US hasn't actually changed all that much, shocking I know right? What people look at as change in our history, civil rights and slavery shit, human rights whatever was already there in the Constitution, the Declaration and the Bill of Rights from the beginning.

What changed is there stopped being secondary tiers of people, as far as the letter of the law was concerned. The contradiction collapsed and the liberties and freedoms guaranteed therein became an across the board thing as they should have been from the start.

So this whole notion of change, of breaking away from our traditions and values is fucking stupid, and everyone who suggests it is doubly so because the ideas and premises have been right in your face the entire time and the only "change" that ever had to happen and did happen was that they had to be applied universally. Now that they are the entire argument can be put in the trash because it's really just bellyachers crying not for the freedoms they've been 'denied' but for the power to suppress someone/thing else.

Our laws serve the good of our society, and our society would be much better if the laws were applied strictly and completely. There doesn't need to be any radical changes, the basic tenets of the Constitution just need to be applied direct and strict which of course means a good chunk of the 100k pages of laws created after the Constitution need to go in the trash too.

[Violent]

This is a joke, right? Please tell me you are not being serious.

Not really..

Wait, Do you people really think there is a solution to be found regarding terrorism and how to prevent it?

I think the joke here is clear.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Which would have led to the unknown, right? Therefore you can only assume malicious intent regardless of who was or wasnt hurt. Anyone who comes to our country should come with good intentions. The fact that you find that they were here as not a big deal shocks me. They shouldn't have been able to get through in the first place since our current vetting process is so good and all.

No vetting process is going to flag every single person who has ill intent. There will always be holes one can slip through. You should never pin all your hopes that one agency will stop them all. These guys got through 1 level...but were stopped by the next before they could actually do anything. That's a working system.

[Cyanu]

Those American values are extended to citizens and citizens alone, there is zero obligation to provide them to people who aren't citizens and who may serve as a threat or detriment to the citizens.

The individualism highlight in the American Constitution is again a highlight for citizens and citizens alone. The freedoms again, citizens only.

So for the sake of your entire little rant at the end I'll say again: The freedoms and liberties of the US Constitution are extended to US citizens and extend to our borders, and that's the be all end all of it. People in other parts of the world have no claim on them at all.

Sorry kid, I didn't even vote in the election let alone for Trump, so take your low intelligence line and shove it up your ass.

The more you know.

so your vision is that of a first world country to it's citizens and a third world authoritarian brothel to others?

apart from the obvious issues of american muslims, dual citizenships, american non-muslims with citizenship from the said countries, people who never got involved in any of that shit and are just banned for no reason and whatever else the Donald managed to not think off (he's very good at that)

values are universal, either you believe on them or you don't, if you only apply them due to 'obligation' you're a hypocrite

seriously what are you afraid of those people? i assure you Trump's abolishment of Obamacare will kill more than they ever will, bets are on

btw why you didn't vote for Trump? you have something against the color orange?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Not really..

Wait, Do you people really think there is a solution to be found regarding terrorism and how to prevent it?

I think the joke here is clear.

I don't think I've said anything of even remotely close to that.

[Deleted]

The only reason any terrorists are born in America is because in America you have that opportunity, any other nation stamps out dissidents quicker than anything but then people like you scream "Human Rights!" and call them Tyrants.

... what?

[mauserr]

ITT I learned that terrorism is ok as long as nobody gets killed, its just all fun and games. smh, kysf

[Damajin]

so your vision is that of a first world country to it's citizens and a third world authoritarian brothel to others?

apart from the obvious issues of american muslims, dual citizenships, american non-muslims with citizenship from the said countries, people who never got involved in any of that shit and are just banned for no reason and whatever else the Donald managed to not think off (he's very good at that)

values are universal, either you believe on them or you don't, if you only apply them due to 'obligation' you're a hypocrite

seriously what are you afraid of those people? i assure you Trump's abolishment of Obamacare will kill more than they ever will, bets are on

btw why you didn't vote for Trump? you have something against the color orange?

No, my vision for the country is that it works in accord and for the betterment of its' citizens and engages fairly and openly with the rest of the world, never forgetting that protecting its' people and their interests is the primary concern and doing so in a non exploitive manner.

Dual citizenship shouldn't exist, period.

Values as far as national values extend to the citizens and to the borders, and that's it. Universal values are never more important than individual national and cultural values. Fuck universalists.

It's not fear, and that you automatically equate it to that is stupid. Protecting what you value, who you love and care for and everything you and they have done and will do is the motivation.

I didn't vote for Trump because he's not my guy and I sure as shit didn't believe in Hillary. I don't support either major US party as it is two sides of the same shit coin.

[AlphaOut]

No vetting process is going to flag every single person who has ill intent. There will always be holes one can slip through. You should never pin all your hopes that one agency will stop them all. These guys got through 1 level...but were stopped by the next before they could actually do anything. That's a working system.

I can get in board with you on that. Totally agree. I'd really like to see this new vetting process that's supposedly in the works, because it 'could' have turned into a plane hijack- of course that's a reach and complete hypothetical, but we'd be having a different conversation taking different stances. I hate to be the type of person that thinks, "well at least it was only this that happened." When the reality is it could have been a lot worse. I'd never expect a perfect system but our borders through aviation better be our strongest. Hell I've gone through an airport last year without having to step through a metal detector or their screening system, granted I fly all the time. There are definitely weaknesses that need to be addressed.

[Slybak]

If I'm following your logic, we should lock up all white males in a given age demographic before there's another school shooting. /shrug.

Why just white males? Men in general account for 4 out of 5 convicted violent criminals, 9 out of 10 convicted murderers, and 19 out of 20 convicted mass murderers. For safety's sake we should just lock them all up, but our society is too PC to even consider it.

[Elegiac]

Dual citizenship shouldn't exist, period.

Because you say so, right.

[Jastall]

What is also a fact is that these 2 countries have actual, functional governments.

But hey, let's ignore that fact and act like idiots, i love how easy it is to look down on you people, the self retardation through virtue signalization is amazing!!

One of these governments also being one of, if not the, biggest sponsor of Islamic terrorism in the world, and worst example of extremist Sharia law application second only to ISIS itself. The only reason Saudi Arabia isn't on the list is because the US actually have interests there, not because the place cannot breed terrorists and extremists.

You guys think this was about principles? Ha. No one gives a fuck about principles in international politics. The list was cobbled together from 7 countries where the US have little interests so that Trump could claim that he's tough on terrorism without actually offending anyone that matters, when existing measures weed out the chaff just fine. I think the US is being played here. It's all a smokescreen that wouldn't have accomplished jack shit. But Trump would have been able to say he did something, so there's that I guess.

If you want to be safe while driving your car, being proactive means obeying all reasonable safety measures, being alert and never driving drunk. It doesn't mean never even using your car because there's a risk, that's just cutting your nose to spite your face.

[Damajin]

Because you say so, right.

I see you don't have any response to what I actually said to you. I thought that might be the case.

As to dual citizenship, it makes zero sense to encourage divided loyalties and all the other rampant problems that come about from it. Then again it's amusing to see an authoritarian argue for something that by design decreases and undermines authority.

[Elegiac]

I see you don't have any response to what I actually said to you. I thought that might be the case.

As to dual citizenship, it makes zero sense to encourage divided loyalties and all the other rampant problems that come about from it. Then again it's amusing to see an authoritarian argue for something that by design decreases and undermines authority.

You're implying possessing citizenship somehow guarantees loyalty.

[Deleted]

I see you don't have any response to what I actually said to you. I thought that might be the case.

As to dual citizenship, it makes zero sense to encourage divided loyalties and all the other rampant problems that come about from it. Then again it's amusing to see an authoritarian argue for something that by design decreases and undermines authority.

How you deal with internal terrorism then?

Terrorism has nothing to do with citizenship, at all.

[Damajin]

You're implying possessing citizenship somehow guarantees loyalty.

Nothing does, of course. What I'm implying is that dual citizenship goes much farther to undermining the creation and sustenance of loyalty than singular citizenship does. Our Founding Fathers thought this as well.

How you deal with internal terrorism then?

Terrorism has nothing to do with citizenship, at all.

Harshly.

I know it doesn't, but the kid I was responding to who Didactic decided to take up for rather than respond to what I actually said to him previous was arguing for universalism, and that somehow and for some unnamed reasons the freedoms and liberties guaranteed us in our Constitution should just be extended to the whole world, which is of course bullshit but this is MMOC so yeah, bullshit happens.

[Elegiac]

Nothing does, of course. What I'm implying is that dual citizenship goes much farther to undermining the creation and sustenance of loyalty than singular citizenship does. Our Founding Fathers thought this as well.

You mean less easy to indoctrinate people into a 'my country, right or wrong' mindset that is ultimately more harmful that actually looking at things in relative terms? Sure.

The Founding Fathers didn't have sufficient foresight to define citizenship in the foundational document of the state they created, so I think we can safely discount whatever rubbish they believed.