Text of Muslim Ban Executive Order in a few posts

dignin

JC29856 said:

What's the number of travelers that were actually detained at airports? WH says 109.
(1 is too many but I'm trying to get a solid number of those detained at US airports)

Fact check: White House claims 109 affected by travel ban - it's more like 90,000

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fact-check-people-affected-by-travel-ban-20170130-story.html

JC29856

Shocked that for 18 months now Trump called for banning and extreme vetting of immigrants, and once in office issued EOs to that end? I wouldnt call that shocking, if it is shocking then you weren't paying attention.
Sessions will be confirmed even if Trump did absolutely nothing in the days since his inauguration. Excluding DeVos who else have the Democrats pushed back on??

JC29856

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

What's the number of travelers that were actually detained at airports? WH says 109.
(1 is too many but I'm trying to get a solid number of those detained at US airports)

Fact check: White House claims 109 affected by travel ban - it's more like 90,000

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fact-check-people-affected-by-travel-ban-20170130-story.html

Thanks for the info, but I was looking for the actual number of people detained due to the illegal and unconstitutional Muslim ban, not affected.
Since the AG and federal judges blocked the order, Im curious to know how many slam dunk law suits will be won against Trump and the justice department for the illegal and unconstitutional detainment and/or deportation of Muslims.

dignin

JC29856 said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

What's the number of travelers that were actually detained at airports? WH says 109.
(1 is too many but I'm trying to get a solid number of those detained at US airports)

Fact check: White House claims 109 affected by travel ban - it's more like 90,000

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fact-check-people-affected-by-travel-ban-20170130-story.html

Thanks for the info, but I was looking for the actual number of people detained due to the illegal and unconstitutional Muslim ban, not affected.
Since the AG and federal judges blocked the order, Im curious to know how many slam dunk law suits will be won against Trump and the justice department for the illegal and unconstitutional detainment and/or deportation of Muslims.

You're trying to minimize this.

Halifax2TheMax

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

What's the number of travelers that were actually detained at airports? WH says 109.
(1 is too many but I'm trying to get a solid number of those detained at US airports)

Fact check: White House claims 109 affected by travel ban - it's more like 90,000

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fact-check-people-affected-by-travel-ban-20170130-story.html

Thanks for the info, but I was looking for the actual number of people detained due to the illegal and unconstitutional Muslim ban, not affected.
Since the AG and federal judges blocked the order, Im curious to know how many slam dunk law suits will be won against Trump and the justice department for the illegal and unconstitutional detainment and/or deportation of Muslims.

You're trying to minimize this.

Of course s/he is. It's only 12% of muslims that are affected.

Ms. Haiku

JC29856 said:

Thanks for the info, but I was looking for the actual number of people detained due to the illegal and unconstitutional Muslim ban, not affected.
Since the AG and federal judges blocked the order, Im curious to know how many slam dunk law suits will be won against Trump and the justice department for the illegal and unconstitutional detainment and/or deportation of Muslims.

I think this is the first lawsuit:

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316929-muslim-group-files-lawsuit-against-trump-order
The Council on American-Islamic Relations' (CAIR) suit questions the constitutionality of the controversial executive order signed last Friday that affects immigration and refugees.

“We, as attorneys, are foot soldiers of the American Constitution and took an oath to protect all from being targeted by the government because of their faith,” he added. CAIR lists Trump, new Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, the State Department and the director of national intelligence as defendants in its lawsuit, filed Monday in a Virginia federal court

Among the more than 20 plaintiffs are Somali and Yemeni student visa holders, a Syrian national serving as an imam in Michigan and even the husband of a pregnant Sudanese national.

JC29856

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

What's the number of travelers that were actually detained at airports? WH says 109.
(1 is too many but I'm trying to get a solid number of those detained at US airports)

Fact check: White House claims 109 affected by travel ban - it's more like 90,000

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fact-check-people-affected-by-travel-ban-20170130-story.html

Thanks for the info, but I was looking for the actual number of people detained due to the illegal and unconstitutional Muslim ban, not affected.
Since the AG and federal judges blocked the order, Im curious to know how many slam dunk law suits will be won against Trump and the justice department for the illegal and unconstitutional detainment and/or deportation of Muslims.

You're trying to minimize this.

I'm trying to get a number of how many lawsuits will be filed and won against the justice department. Those that were actually detained and deported have the strongest case, say vs those that we only affected, althou I would expect maybe a class action suit on behalf of the 90,000.

Ms. Haiku

JC29856 said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

What's the number of travelers that were actually detained at airports? WH says 109.
(1 is too many but I'm trying to get a solid number of those detained at US airports)

Fact check: White House claims 109 affected by travel ban - it's more like 90,000

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fact-check-people-affected-by-travel-ban-20170130-story.html

Thanks for the info, but I was looking for the actual number of people detained due to the illegal and unconstitutional Muslim ban, not affected.
Since the AG and federal judges blocked the order, Im curious to know how many slam dunk law suits will be won against Trump and the justice department for the illegal and unconstitutional detainment and/or deportation of Muslims.

I think it is in that article. It doesn't look conclusive, but it gives an idea. It doesn't reflect slam dunk law suits, just yet:

The "109" number is old, and rather dubious. For instance, it does not reflect how many people were prevented from even boarding a plane. According to the Department of Homeland Security, 348 people were denied boarding from the issuance of the executive order on Friday through 6 p.m. on Sunday.

An additional 392 green-card holders have been processed and admitted to the United States, the agency says. Originally, the White House had said that green-card holders would also be blocked from entering, but it reversed itself on Sunday under political pressure.

Officials have not responded to repeated requests for an updated number on the number of people detained at U.S. airports. However, the Daily Beast reported that an additional 200 to 250 people were denied entry once their flights landed -- and they were part of a larger pool of 735 people at ports of entry who could have been barred from entering the United States.

A Google spreadsheet tracking the experience of Iranian travelers has documented the travails of nearly 300 people, with many describing significant delays or negotiation even if they were allowed into the United States.

dignin

JC29856 said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

What's the number of travelers that were actually detained at airports? WH says 109.
(1 is too many but I'm trying to get a solid number of those detained at US airports)

Fact check: White House claims 109 affected by travel ban - it's more like 90,000

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fact-check-people-affected-by-travel-ban-20170130-story.html

Thanks for the info, but I was looking for the actual number of people detained due to the illegal and unconstitutional Muslim ban, not affected.
Since the AG and federal judges blocked the order, Im curious to know how many slam dunk law suits will be won against Trump and the justice department for the illegal and unconstitutional detainment and/or deportation of Muslims.

You're trying to minimize this.

I'm trying to get a number of how many lawsuits will be filed and won against the justice department. Those that were actually detained and deported have the strongest case, say vs those that we only affected, althou I would expect maybe a class action suit on behalf of the 90,000.

That is not what you are trying to do. If you cared you could find the answers you're looking for yourself, but that's not your MO.

JC29856

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

What's the number of travelers that were actually detained at airports? WH says 109.
(1 is too many but I'm trying to get a solid number of those detained at US airports)

Fact check: White House claims 109 affected by travel ban - it's more like 90,000

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-fact-check-people-affected-by-travel-ban-20170130-story.html

Thanks for the info, but I was looking for the actual number of people detained due to the illegal and unconstitutional Muslim ban, not affected.
Since the AG and federal judges blocked the order, Im curious to know how many slam dunk law suits will be won against Trump and the justice department for the illegal and unconstitutional detainment and/or deportation of Muslims.

You're trying to minimize this.

I'm trying to get a number of how many lawsuits will be filed and won against the justice department. Those that were actually detained and deported have the strongest case, say vs those that we only affected, althou I would expect maybe a class action suit on behalf of the 90,000.

That is not what you are trying to do. If you cared you could find the answers you're looking for yourself, but that's not your MO.

Your right like I didnt try..."Officials have not responded to repeated requests for an updated number on the number of people detained at U.S. airports."

dignin

But brown people are the real threat!

The report concluded that “lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent right-wing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States.”

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31/the-fbi-has-quietly-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforcement/

Halifax2TheMax

Global Citizen's spin:

This policy orders the:
• Complete suspension of travel from seven predominantly Muslim nationalities — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. This includes dual-nationals, green card holders, and most visa-holders.
• Full suspension of US refugee program for 120 days as new “extreme vetting” rules are developed, even though America already has the toughest vetting program for refugees in the world.
• Halving America’s refugee intake to a maximum of 50,000 annually, with a complete ban on admitting refugees from war-torn Syria.
• Exemption for those of a “minority religion” in each of these countries — a phrase that can only be interpreted to exclude Muslims on the basis of their religion.

dignin

White House claims five-year-old boy detained in US airport for hours 'could have posed a security threat'
The little boy is reportedly a US citizen who lives with his mother in Maryland

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/white-house-five-year-old-boy-detained-dulles-international-airport-hours-sean-spicer-pose-security-a7554521.html?cmpid=facebook-post

JC29856

With all of the sudden interest in and defense of Muslims, here are some pew research reports and links for more information. There is one link within the site where it contrasts the differing opinions of Muslims by democrats and republicans, it leaves out all those (about 47%) that do not affiliate with either party.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/22/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

unsung

Halifax2TheMax said:

Ms. Haiku said:

Heather Richardson, Professor of History, Boston College wrote in a Twitter thread that this Executive Order is a "shock event." That it causes chaos to ultimately get what Trump wants which is Sessions elected. She has a long Twitter thread for this, but this following tweet is part of it.

https://twitter.com/womanistpsych
Jefferson Sessions being received as the acceptable one, as head of DOJ, to restore order to Bannon's generated chaos is one of the setups.

Do you think this is a shock event, and that Sessions as AG could be the goal?

I'm not completely convinced that this is a "shock event." It looks like Trump is doing what he said he would do. I think the Executive Order for the wall could be considered a shock event as well, but putting a wall up was part of his presidential campaign.

So was banning Muslims.

Fake news. Muslims are not banned.

unsung

josevolution said:

unsung said:

josevolution said:

unsung said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

tbergs said:

bootlegger10 said:

Go Beavers said:

bootlegger10 said:

tbergs said:

Release Mii said:

JC29856 said:

Funny...I don't see the word Muslim anywhere in the text, nor do I see any country listed other than Syria.

If that is a Muslim ban, Trump excluded countries that comprise about 90% of worldwide Muslims.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_world

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

Its right here:

(c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f)

Kind of like how they left "Jews" out of the post paying respect to the "innocents" of the Holocaust. In Trump's world, if you don't utter the phrases then you have plausible deniability that you supported a certain stance with your base supporters while making those who read between the line sound like they are the one's being irrational and insensitive.

I think the outrage to the tweet is a stretch. I think when you bring up the Holocaust it implies the victims were the Jews. Trump wants to move the embassy to Jerusalem so I don't think the administration is anti-Israel.

It was an intentional omission. Now as to why, that's left up to the individual.

Yeah, I think this particular issue (Holocaust tweet) is a phony media/left attack job only. Certainly, the immigrant ban is something that you can strongly disagree with.

I'm unsure about the tweet wording controversy. They have admitted it was left out intentionally, but I question if it was done to be more inclusive as they say, since they have taken a divisive approach on every other topic. The problem with this administration is that they lie so much it's hard to know what's really going on.

probably because Bannon was in the room when he wrote it. trump was afraid of the big bad nazi.

Actually Obama picked the countries.

And this isn't a Muslim ban, otherwise the country with the largest Muslim population (Indonesia) would be included.

The folks that were detained what were they Orthodox Jews lol

I have no idea, but they were from the countries that Obama selected. This isn't about religion, if it were Indonesia would be banned.

Yeah ok I guess in your retreat you don't get any info on who was detained like I asked were they Orthodox Jews or folks of Muslim faith ? Go ahead keep on playing I don't know who it was game ! But it was Obama who chose those nations that is true no doubt I just don't recall how many people were detained at airports on the 1st day of implementation !

It doesn't matter who has been stopped, nobody is detained. They can't enter based on their country.

How is this so hard to understand?

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Ms. Haiku said:

Heather Richardson, Professor of History, Boston College wrote in a Twitter thread that this Executive Order is a "shock event." That it causes chaos to ultimately get what Trump wants which is Sessions elected. She has a long Twitter thread for this, but this following tweet is part of it.

https://twitter.com/womanistpsych
Jefferson Sessions being received as the acceptable one, as head of DOJ, to restore order to Bannon's generated chaos is one of the setups.

Do you think this is a shock event, and that Sessions as AG could be the goal?

I'm not completely convinced that this is a "shock event." It looks like Trump is doing what he said he would do. I think the Executive Order for the wall could be considered a shock event as well, but putting a wall up was part of his presidential campaign.

So was banning Muslims.

Fake news. Muslims are not banned.

According to JC, 12% of muslims are banned.

unsung

Halifax2TheMax said:

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Ms. Haiku said:

Heather Richardson, Professor of History, Boston College wrote in a Twitter thread that this Executive Order is a "shock event." That it causes chaos to ultimately get what Trump wants which is Sessions elected. She has a long Twitter thread for this, but this following tweet is part of it.

https://twitter.com/womanistpsych
Jefferson Sessions being received as the acceptable one, as head of DOJ, to restore order to Bannon's generated chaos is one of the setups.

Do you think this is a shock event, and that Sessions as AG could be the goal?

I'm not completely convinced that this is a "shock event." It looks like Trump is doing what he said he would do. I think the Executive Order for the wall could be considered a shock event as well, but putting a wall up was part of his presidential campaign.

So was banning Muslims.

Fake news. Muslims are not banned.

According to JC, 12% of muslims are banned.

Based on country, not religion.

Countries that Obama picked.

None of you protested when he froze visas.

dignin

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Ms. Haiku said:

Heather Richardson, Professor of History, Boston College wrote in a Twitter thread that this Executive Order is a "shock event." That it causes chaos to ultimately get what Trump wants which is Sessions elected. She has a long Twitter thread for this, but this following tweet is part of it.

https://twitter.com/womanistpsych
Jefferson Sessions being received as the acceptable one, as head of DOJ, to restore order to Bannon's generated chaos is one of the setups.

Do you think this is a shock event, and that Sessions as AG could be the goal?

I'm not completely convinced that this is a "shock event." It looks like Trump is doing what he said he would do. I think the Executive Order for the wall could be considered a shock event as well, but putting a wall up was part of his presidential campaign.

So was banning Muslims.

Fake news. Muslims are not banned.

According to JC, 12% of muslims are banned.

Based on country, not religion.

Countries that Obama picked.

None of you protested when he froze visas.

Spoon fed by Spicer. Not all of us are so easily duped.

Continue believing what you want, this policy does help keep the white race pure.

JC29856

dignin said:

White House claims five-year-old boy detained in US airport for hours 'could have posed a security threat'
The little boy is reportedly a US citizen who lives with his mother in Maryland

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/white-house-five-year-old-boy-detained-dulles-international-airport-hours-sean-spicer-pose-security-a7554521.html?cmpid=facebook-post

maybe he has priors, was he was previously detained by Israel for throwing stones at IDFs?